Skip to main content

Full text of "The history of infant baptism : together with Mr. Gale's Reflections, and Dr. Wall's Defence"

See other formats 


^10^^  PR!?^Cr?^^ 


^'a) 


^^OGicAL  sE^'-!::^-- 


BV  813  .W3  1844  V.2 
wall,  William 
The  history  of 
infant -baptism 


(I. 


tV;  w<Lw^w  ^' 


G^ 


V 


THE  HISTORY 

OF  INFANT-BAPTISM. 

WILLIAM   WALL,   M.A. 

VICAR  OF  SHOREHAM,  KENT,  AND  OF   MILTON  NEXT  GRAVESEND. 
/        TOGETHEB   WITH 

MR.  GALE'S  REFLECTIONS, 

./  AND 

DR.  WALL'S  DEFENCE. 


SECOND  EDITION, 
BY  THE  REV.  HENRY  COTTON,  D.C.L. 

LATE    STUDENT    OF    CHRIST    CHURCH. 


IN  FOUR  VOLUMES. 
VOL.  II. 


OXFORD: 

AT    THE    UNIVERSITY    PRESS. 

MDCCCXLIV. 


THE 

CONTENTS  OF  THE  SECOND  PART. 


CHAP.  I. 

Of  some  other  passages  which  are  by  some  quoted  and  pretended 
to  be  to  this  purpose,  but  are  not. 
§.  I,  Some  are  out  of  spurious  books,  lately  forged,  p.  i- 
§.2.  Some  nothing  to  the  purpose,  p.  2.  §.3.  Some  wrested  and 
altered,  p.  6.  §.  4.  Some  not  the  author's  own  words,  but  con- 
clusions unfairly  drawn  and  set  down  as  the  author's  words,  p.  8. 
§.  5.  Some  absolutely  false  :  instances  of  each  of  these  sorts  of 
quotations,  p.  9. 

CHAP.   H. 

The  opinions  of  modern  learned  men  concerning  the  ancient  practice 
or  omission  of  pcedobajjtism. 
§.  I.  They  do  almost  all  conclude,  that  it  was  the  general 
practice  to  baptize  infants :  some  few  think  that  this  was  not  at 
all  practised  at  the  first ;  and  others,  that  it  was  at  first  held  to 
be  indifferent,  p.  12.  §.  2.  The  opinion  of  Walafridus  Strabo, 
p.  13.  §.  3.  Of  Ludovicus  Vives,  p.  16.  §.  4.  Of  Curcellaeus, 
p.  17.  §.5.  Of  Rigaltius,  p.  18.  §.  6.  Of  bishop  Jeremy 
Taylor.  He  himself  answered  the  arguments  he  had  brought  in 
his  Liberty  of  Prophesying  against  the  antiquity  of  infant- 
baptism,  p.  22.  §.  7.  Of  Dr.  Barlow  bishop  of  Lincoln,  p.  27. 
§.  8.  Of  BiliuSj  and  Salmasius,  p.  28.  §.  9.  Of  Hugo  Grotius. 
He  was  the  author  of  the  opinion,  that  it  was  held  indifferent, 
p.  31.  §.  10.  Bishop  Taylor  also  judges  it  to  have  been  account- 
ed indifferent,  p.  36.  §.  11.  Of  Mr.  Thorndyke,  p.  37.  §.  12. 
Of  Mr.  Daille,  p.  38.  §.  13.  Of  Mr.  Baxter  and  some  remon- 
strants, p.  39.  §.  14.  Of  Garner  the  Jesuit,  p.  40.  Of  Boemus, 
Macaire,  and  Dr.  Holland,  p.  41.  §.  15.  Of  Mr.  Tombes, 
Mr.  Danvers,  Mr.  Wills,  p.  44.  §.  16.  Most  of  the  modern 
learned  men  that  have  concluded  infant- baptism  to  have  been 

a  2 


iv  CONTENTS  OF 

either  not  from  the  beginning,  or  not  universal,  have  been 
brought  to  this  concession  by  the  instances  of  several  ancients, 
who  are  pretended  to  have  been  born  of  Christian  parents,  and 
yet  not  baptized  in  infancy,  p.  46. 

CHAP.  III. 
Of  those  who  are  said  to  have  been  born  of  Christian  parents, 

and  yet  not  baptized  till  of  man's  age. 
Sect.  I.  An  account  of  the  persons ,  and  state  of  their  case,  p.  48. 
Sect.  II.   Of  Constantine,  and  Constantius  his  son,  p.  47. 
That  they  were  not  born  of  baptized  parents. 
§.  I.  Constantine  was  not  baptized  till  just  before  his  death, 
p.  52.     §.  2.  His  father  was  not  a  Christian,  p.  53.    Nor  his  mo- 
ther, when  he  was  born,  p.  56.     §.  3.  Constantius'  parents  were 
not  baptized   Christians  when  he  was  born,  nor  a  long  time 
after,  p.  57. 

Sect.  HI.   Of  Gratian  and  Valentinian  the  second,  p.  60. 

There  is  no  pi-oof  that  their  father  tvas  a  baptized  Christian  when 
they  were  born. 
§.  I.  The  history  of  their  father,  p.  60.  §.  2.  The  time  of 
the  birth  and  death  of  each  of  them,  p.  62.  §.3.  Valentinian 
desired  baptism  before  his  death,  but  missed  of  it,  p.  66. 
§.  4.  Gratian  probably  was  baptized,  but  not  in  infancy,  p.  68, 
§  5.  Their  father  does  not  appear  to  have  been  baptized  himself, 
till  a  little  before  his  death,  when  the  youngest  of  them  was 
eight  years  old,  p.  69. 

Sect.  IV.   Of  Theodosius  the  first,  p.  70. 
§.  I.  He  was  not  baptized  till  after  he  was  emperor,  p.  70. 
§.  2.   His  father  was  not  a  baptized  Christian  till  he  (the  son) 
was  twenty-five  years  old,  p.  71. 

Sect.  V.   Of  St.  Basil,  p.  72. 
There  is  no  proof  to  the  contrary,   but  that  he  was  baptized  in 

infancy. 
§.  I.  The  quotations  brought  by  Mi*.  Danvers  for  his  baptism 
at  his  adult  age,  are  some  of  them  forged,  others  unfairly  re- 
cited, p.  72.      §    2.  Amphilochius'  life  of  St.  Basil,  from  whence 
this  story  is  fetched,  is  a  forged  piece,  p.  73.     §.  3.  Nazianzen 


THE  SECOND  PART.  \ 

Nyssen,  and  Ephraim  Syrus,  writing  the  passages  of  his  life, 
have  no  such  thing,  p.  74.  §.  4.  The  same  man  that  baptized 
him,  did  afterward  give  him  ordination,  p.  75. 

Sect.  VI.    Of  St.  Gregory  Nazianzen,  p.  76. 
He  was  not  baptized  in  infancy,  though  probably  born  of  baptized 

parents. 
§.  I.  An  account  when  he  was  baptized,  p.  76.  §.  2.  His 
father  was  not  a  Christian  till  the  year  325,  p.  77.  §.  3.  The  old 
account  is,  that  the  son  was  born  anno  300,  which  is  contradict- 
ed by  Baronius,  p.  78,  §.  4.  Papebrochius  resettles  the  old 
account,  and  answers  Baronius,  p.  79.  §.  5.  A  quotation  out  of 
Gregory  himself,  that  he  was  born  after  that  his  father  was  in 
orders,  p  82.  §.  6.  Some  other  reasons  on  each  side  examined, 
p.  84.  §.  7.  An  inquiry  when  his  sister  Gorgonia  and  brother 
CcEsarius  were  baptized,  p.  87. 

Skct.  Vn.   Of  Nectarius,  p.  89. 
§.  I.  He  was  elected  bishop  before  he  was  baptized,  p.  89. 
§.  2.  There   is  not  the  least  pretence   that   his  parents   were 
Christians,  p.  91. 

Sect.  VIH.  Of  St.  Chrysostom,  p.  91. 
His  parents  ivere  probably  heathens  at  the  time  of  his  birth. 
§.  1.  Ancient  historians  do  say  they  were,  p.  91.  §•  2.  Grotius, 
without  giving  any  reason,  affirms  the  contrary,  p.  92.  §.  3. 
Proof  out  of  Sozomen,  that  Chrysostom  himself  was  for  some 
time  a  heathen,  p.  95.  §.  4.  Mr.  Du  Pin's  quotations  on  this 
subject  examined,  ibid. 

Sect.  IX.  Of  St.  Ambrose,  p.  97. 
There  is  no  account  of  his  parents  being  Christians  at  the  time 
of  his  birth. 
§.  I.  He  was  chosen  for  bishop  before  he  was  baptized,  p.  97. 
§.2.  There  is  no  proof  that  his  parents  were  Christians  at  the 
time  of  his  birth,  p.  98.  §.  3.  There  is  very  probable  proof  from 
his  own  words  of  the  contrary,  p.  100. 

Sect.  X.    There  is  no  proof  to  the  contrary,  but  that  St.  Hierome 
was  baptized  in  infancy,  p.  100. 
§.  I.  Erasmus  thought  he  was  baptized  at  Rome,  because  he 


vi  CONTENTS  OF 

says  he  there  took  on  him  the  garment  of  Christ,  p.  102. 
§.  2.  St.  Hierome  by  that  phrase  means  the  monk's  habit,  p.  103. 
§.3.  Baronius'  reason  to  the  contrary  considered,  page  105. 
§.  4.  The  objection  taken  from  his  ordination  answered,  p.  108. 
§.5.  The  state  of  the  monastic  life  at  that  timej  p.  112.  St. 
Hierome's  excessive  value  for  it,  p.  113. 

Sect.  XI.   Of  St.  Justin,  p.  j  15. 

His   father   tvas    a     heathen   when    he    was    born,    arid    a     long 
time  after. 

§.  I.  He  was  thirty-three  years  old  when  he  was  baptized, 
p.  T15.  §.  2.  His  father  did  not  turn  Christian  till  he  (St.  Au- 
stin) was  seventeen  years  old,  p.  116.  §•  3-  St.  Austin  was  a 
Manichee,  and  then  a  deist,  before  he  was  a  Christian,  p.  120. 

Sect.  XII.    Of  Monica,    Adeodatns,    Alipius,    and   some    others. 
Theij  do  none  of  them  make  instances  to  this  purpose,  p.  121. 

§.  1 .  It  is  not  known  whether  Monica  were  born  of  Christian 
parents,  and  baptized  in  infancy,  or  of  heathens,  and  baptized  at 
years  of  discretion,  p.  1  20.  §.  2.  St.  Austin  was  no  Christian 
when  his  son  Adeodatus  was  born  :  as  soon  as  he  was  baptized 
himself,  he  got  his  son  baptized,  ibid.  §.  3.  Alipius  was  a  hea- 
then first,  and  then  a  Christian,  p.  122.  §.4.  A  reflection  on 
Mr.  Delaune's  quotations  against  infant-baptism,  taken  out  of 
Danvers,  pp.  86.  123. 

CHAP.   IV. 

Of  the  church  of  the  ancient  Britons,  and  of  the  sects  of  the 
Novatians  and  Donatists,  which  are  by  some  thought  to  have 
been  antipcedobaptists.     And  of  the  Arians,  p.  i  26. 

§.  I.  Danvers'  proof  from  Fabian's  Chronicle,  that  the  ancient 
Britons  were  against  infant-baptism,  is  grounded  on  the  mis- 
printing of  two  or  three  words  in  one  edition  of  that  book :  the 
contrary  proved,  p.  i  27.  §.  2.  The  pretence  that  the  Novatians 
and  Donatists  denied  infants'  baptism,  has  no  proof:  there  is 
proof  to  the  contrary,  p.  129.  §.  3.  The  Arians  called  ana- 
l<aptists :  not  that  they  disliked  infant-baptism,  but  because 
they  rebaptized  all  that  had  been  baptized  by  the  catholics, 
P-I.33- 


THE  SECOND  PART.  vii 

CHAP.  V. 

Of  some  heretics  that  denied  all  water-baptism :  and  of  others 
that  gave  baptism  several  times  to  the  same  person.  The  dis- 
pute in  the  catholic  church  about  rebaptizing .  Of  the  Pau- 
lianists,  whom  the  Nicene  Fathers  ordered  to  be  baptized  anew, 
if  they  would  come  into  the  church.  The  revenge  which  the 
modern  Paulianists  take  on  those  Fathers,  by  accusing  them  of 
Tritheism.  The  falseness  of  that  accusation,  p.  135. 
§.  I.  The  V^alentinians,  some  of  them,  renounced  all  external 
baptism  ;  others  profaned  it  by  their  alterations  of  the  form,  &c. 
Their  several  tenets  concerning  it  out  of  Irenaeus,  p.  136. 
§.  2.  Quintilla  preached  at  Carthage  in  the  second  century, 
that  water- baptism  is  needless;  faith  alone  is  enough,  p.  138. 
§.3.  The  Manichees  held,  that  baptism  in  water  does  nobody 
any  good,  ibid.  §.  4.  The  Messalians  held  the  same,  being  a 
distracted  sort  of  people,  p.  139.  And  so  did  the  Ascodryti, 
Archontici,  and  Seleucians,  or  Hermians,  p.  141.  §.  5.  The  Mar- 
cionites  of  old,  and  the  Muscovites  of  late,  the  only  persons  in 
the  world  that  ever  owned  formal  anabaptism,  or  rebaptization 
of  the  same  person  several  times,  p.  142.  §.  6.  The  dispute 
among  the  catholics,  whether  baptism  given  by  heretics  be  valid, 
or  must  be  reiterated.  Baptism  given  in  the  right  form  of  words, 
though  by  heretics,  adjudged  valid,  p.  144.  §•  7.  The  Pau- 
lianists excepted  by  the  council  of  Nice  from  the  number  of  he- 
retics that  were  to  have  this  privilege,  p.  145.  §.  8.  The  modern 
Paulianists  do,  in  revenge,  accuse  the  Nicene  and  other  Fathers 
of  Tritheism  :  and  that  they  held  not  a  numerical,  but  only  a 
specifical,  unity  of  the  divine  essence,  p.  146.  §.  9.  They  per- 
sist in  affirming  this  as  proved  by  Curcellaeus,  after  tliat  all 
the  instances  produced  by  Curcellaeus  had  been  by  bishop 
Stillingfleet  shewed  to  be  mistakes.  The  open  affront  given  by 
Mr.  Le  Clerc  to  all  the  churches  that  own  the  Nicene  creed, 
p.  149.  §.  10.  The  new  instances  they  bring  from  Tertullian, 
answered,  p.  151.  §.  11.  And  those  they  bring  from  Gregory 
Nazianzen,  p.  155.  §.  12.  The  heresies  of  Praxeas,  Noetus,  and 
Sabeliius  on  one  side,  and  Philoponus  on  the  other  ;  and  the 
way  the  churchmen  take  to  refute  them  ;  do  plainly  shew  that 
the  church  held  the  numerical  unity,  p.  161.  §.  13.  St.  Austin, 
St.  Hierome,  St.  Ambrose,  &c.  do  express  fully  the  numerical 
unity  of  the  essence:  but  these  are  blackened  on  other  accounts, 
p.  i68.      §.  14.  The  mischief  brought  on  the  credit  of  Christian 


viii  CONTENTS  OF 

religion,  by  vilifying  the  ancient  professors  of  it,  because  their 
sayings  cannot  be  brought  to  serve  a  turn,  p.  169.  §.15.  St. 
Austin  also  in  a  late  piece  is  made  a  Tritheist,  p.  173.  §.  16. 
St.  Hilary  vindicated  from  the  same  imputation,  p.  175. 

CHAP.  VI. 

The  opinions  of  the  ancients  concerning  the  future  state  of  infants, 
and  other  persons  that  happened  to  die  unbaptized,  p.  180. 

§.  I.  They  do  all  understand  that  rule  of  our  Saviour,  John  iii.  5, 
Except  one  be  born  again,  &c.,  of  water  baptism.  Calvin's  new 
interpretation  of  that  text  ;  and  the  advantage  which  the  anti- 
psedubaptists  do  take  of  it.  Also  they  do  all  by  the  kingdom  of 
God  in  that  text,  understand  the  kingdom  of  glory.  The  in- 
consistency of  some  later  interpretations  with  the  words  of  the 
text,  p.  183.  §.2.  Their  opinion  of  the  case  of  martyrs  dying 
unbaptized,  that  they  went  to  heaven,  p.  189.  §.  3.  The  case 
of  converts  believing,  but  dying  unbaptized.  Those  that  had 
contemned  or  neglected  baptism,  condemned.  Those  that  had 
fully  resolved  to  take  it,  but  missed  of  it,  went,  as  some  thought, 
to  a  middle  state  ;  as  others  thought,  to  heaven,  p.  190.  §.  4. 
Of  infants  dying  unbaptized.  All  agree  that  they  miss  of  the 
kingdom  of  heaven.  They  go,  as  the  Greek  Fathers  think,  into 
a  middle  state  ;  as  others,  into  some  degree  of  punishment, 
p.  197.  §.  5.  Of  the  degree  of  their  punishment.  St.  Austin ' 
thinks  it  to  be  a  very  moderate  one  ;  a  state  better  than  no 
being  at  all,  p.  201.  The  books  in  which  the  more  rigid  opinion 
is  held,  are  Fulgentius'  and  not  his,  p.  204.  §.  6.  The  opinions 
of  the  follov/ing  ages.  Fulgentius,  anno  500  ;  Pope  Gregory, 
600  ;  Anselm,  1000;  do  speak  of  their  being  tormented,  p.  206. 
The  schoolmen,  anno  1200,  go  over  to  the  opinion  of  the  Greek 
church,  that  they  shall  be  in  a  middle  state,  p.  208.  The  coun- 
cil of  Trent  were  about  to  determine  the  opinion  of  their  being 
tormented,  to  be  a  heresy,  p.  210.  §.  7.  Some  in  the  middle 
age  have  conceived  liopes  of  some  unbaptized  infants  going  to 
heaven.  Hincmarus  Rhemensis,  p.  210.  Wickliffe,  p.  212.  the 
Lollards,  Hussites,  &c.  p.  215.  (and  the  schoolmen  for  infants 
dying  in  the  womb)  and  in  the  latter  times,  Cajetan  and  Cas- 
sander,  p.  2  1  8.  §.  8.  The  opinions  of  the  protestants,  Lutherans, 
Calvinists,  Church  of  England,  English  presbyterians,  antipse- 
dubaptists,  concerning  the  possibility  of  salvation  of  unbaptized 


THE  SECOND  PART.  ix 

infants,  p.  219.  §.  9.  That  all  baptized  infants,  dying  such,  are 
saved ;  the  generality  of  the  Christian  world  has  agreed,  p.  225. 
The  ancient  Prsedestinarians,  and  Semipelagians,  consented  in 
this.  Of  the  modern  Prsedestinarians,  some  few  have  doubted 
or  denied  it,  p.  229.  §.  10.  The  ancients  never  refused  to  bap- 
tize a  child  on  account  of  the  parents'  wickedness,  as  some 
Calvinists  now  do,  ibid. 

CHAP.  VII. 

An  account  of  the  state  of  this  practice  from  the  year  400  till 
the  rise  of  the  German  antipcedobaptists.  Of  the  Waldenses ; 
and  their  chief  accusers,  St.  Bernard,  Petrus,  Cluniacensis, 
Reynerius,  Pilichdorf,  S;c.  The  confessions  of  the  Waldenses 
themselves,  p.  230. 

§.  I.  There  are  no  pretences  of  any  one  in  this  period,  before 
the  time  of  the  Waldenses,  being  against  infant-baptism,  but 
what  are  proved  to  be  mistakes,  p.  230.  The  instance  of  Hinc- 
marus,  bishop  of  Laudun,  shewn  to  be  such,  p.  232.  §.  2.  Of 
Bruno  bishop  of  Angiers,  and  of  Berengarius  archdeacon  of  the 
same  church,  there  are  reports,  that  they  held  doctrines  that  do 
overthrow  infant-baptism  ;  but  they  never  owned  any  such, 
p.  235.  §.3.  A  general  account  of  the  Waldenses,  anno  1  150. 
What  the  popish  historians  do  say  of  their  tenets.  What  the 
present  remainders  of  them  do  say  of  their  ancestors.  Some  of 
their  old  Confessions.  The  present  debate,  whether  they  were 
anciently  piedobaptists  or  antipsedobaptists,  p.  238.  §.  4.  That 
there  were  several  sects  of  those  men,  whom  we  now  call  by 
that  general  name  Waldenses  ,  and  that  some  of  them  denied 
all  water-baptism.  The  distinct  account  of  their  several  tenets 
about  baptism,  given  by  Reynerius,  &c.  p.  247.  §.  5.  That  one 
sect  of  them,  viz.  the  Petrobrusians,  otherwise  called  Henri- 
cians,  did  own  water-baptism,  and  yet  deny  infant-baptism, 
p.  255.  Four  witnesses  of  this.  The  Lateran  councils  under 
Innocent  the  Second  and  Innocent  the  Third,  p.  265.  Mr.  Sten- 
net's  pretence  to  the  disciples  of  Gundulphus,  anno  1025, 
examined,  p.  262.  §.  6.  That  all  the  rest  of  them  owned 
infant-baptism,  p.  267.  §.  7.  Those  that  denied  it,  quickly 
dwindled  away,  or  came  over  to  those  that  owned  it,  p.  268. 
§.  8.  The  life  of  Peter  Bruis,  and  Henry,  the  two  first  antipsedo- 
baplist  preachers  in  the  world,  p.  273. 


CONTENTS  OF 


CHAP.  VIII. 


The  present   state   of  this   controversy.     That   all  the   national 

churches  in  the  world  are  pcedohaptists.     Of  the  antipcedobap- 

tists   that   are   in    Germany,   Holland,  England,  Poland,   and 
Transylvania,  p.  278. 

§.  1.  All  the  national  churches  in  Europe  are  psedobaptists, 
p.  279.  §.  2.  So  are  those  in  Asia,  p.  280.  A  disquisition  con- 
cerning the  Georgians  ;  of  whom  sir  Paul  Ricaut  had  heard, 
that  they  held  formerly,  that  children  ought  not  to  be  baptized 
till  the  age  of  fourteen,  and  that  they  now  hold,  that  they  are 
not  to  be  baptized  till  eight  years  old.  The  mistake  of  this 
report  shewed  from  sir  John  Chardin,  who  travelled  in  that 
country.  Of  the  Armenians,  Jacobites,  Maronites,  Christians 
of  St. Thomas,  &c.  They  do  all  baptize  infants,  p.  287,  §.  3. 
The  two  sorts  of  Christians  that  are  in  Africa,  viz.  the  Cophti 
and  Abassens,  do  both  of  them  baptize  their  infants  forty  days 
after  their  birth  or  circumcision.  A  mistake  in  the  print  of 
Mr.  Thevenot  concerning  what  he  heard  by  the  relation  of  an 
ambassador  from  the  Abassens,  that  before  the  Jesuits  came 
there,  they  did  not  use  to  baptize  till  forty  years,  putting  years 
for  days,  p.  29  1.  §.  4.  Of  the  antipiBdobaptists  in  Germany,  anno 
1522.  An  inquiry  whether  that  opinion  was  then  set  up  anew, 
or  had  been  continued  from  the  time  of  the  Petrobrusians, 
p.  292.  A  letter  written  to  Erasmus,  anno  15 19,  concerning 
the  Pyghards,  p.  295.  §.  5.  Of  those  in  Holland  and  the  Low 
Countries ;  their  insurrection  at  Amsterdam.  Of  Menno,  and 
the  present  Minnists  ;  their  tenets,  &c.  p.  299.  §.  6.  Of  the 
English  antipiedobaptists.  Some  Dutchmen  in  England,  but 
no  Englishmen,  of  this  way  in  the  reigns  of  Henry  VIII,  Ed- 
ward VI,  Queen  Mary,  Queen  Elizabeth,  p.  306.  No  consi- 
derable number  of  English  till  the  times  of  the  rebellion, 
p.  315.  The  great  encouragement  given  them  by  Oliver  Crom- 
well. Their  great  increase  at  that  time,  p.  317.  The  present 
state  of  them,  p.  323.     Their  tenets  concerning,   1.  Separation. 

2.  Immersion.  Their  reasons  for  the  necessity  of  it.  The  word 
/3a7rrtfa)   does   not  include   dipping   in    its  signification,  p.  326. 

3.  Baptizing  naked.  4.  The  form  of  baptism.  5.  The  flesh  of 
Christ,  p.  335.  6.  The  millennium.  7.  Eating  of  blood, 
8.  Sleep  of  the  soul.     The  opinion  of  the  ancients  concerning 


THE  SECOND  PART.  xi 

Hades,  and  the  state  of  souls  in  it,  p.  344.  9.  Singing  of 
Psalms,  p.  353.  10.  The  use  of  the  Lord's  Prayer.  11.  Ex- 
treme unction.  12.  Way  of  marriage.  13.  Posture  in  receiv- 
ing the  Lord's  Supper.  14.  The  Saturday -sabbath.  15.  Con- 
firmation, or  laying  on  of  hands.  16.  Predestination,  i  7.  Ori- 
ginal sin.  18.  The  divinity  of  Christ,  p.  359.  19.  Their  dis- 
putes with  the  Quakers.  20.  Their  church  officers.  21.  Their 
way  of  adjusting  differences  in  money  matters.  22.  Church 
discipline  against  scandalous  members.  23.  Of  the  Jesuits 
creeping  in  among  them,  p.  371.  Bishop  Stillingfleet's  sa- 
gacity in  discovering  Hallingham,  Coleman,  and  Benson,  to 
have  been  Jesuits.  Of  one  Everard  a  papist,  who  having 
got  in  Cromwell's  time  a  commission  for  a  troop  of  horse, 
set  up  for  a  preacher  against  infant-baptism.  All  the  papists 
do  of  late  years  industriously  put  it  into  their  books,  that  in- 
fant-baptism cannot  be  proved  from  Scripture.  The  weakness 
of  some  late  antiptedobaptists,  in  valuing  themselves  on  the 
papists  thus  siding  with  them  in  the  dispute,  p.  378.  §.  7.  Of  the 
antipiedobaptists  in  Poland,  Hungary,  Transylvania,  &c.  Those 
that  were  formerly  in  Poland,  were  mostly  Socinians  ;  and  so 
are  they  that  are  at  present  in  Transylvania,  p.  380. 

CHAP.    IX. 

The  ancient  rites  of  baptism,  p.  383. 
§.  I.  The  adult  used  prayer  and  fasting  before  it,  p.  383. 
§.  2.  The  ordinary  way  of  baptizing  was  by  immersion  ;  but  in 
case  of  sickness,  &c.  they  gave  it  by  affusion  of  water  on  the 
face.  Some  ancient  proofs  of  this  from  a  letter  of  St.  Cyprian. 
The  examples  of  Novatian,  St.  Laurence,  Basilides,  the  jailor, 
in  Acts  xvi.  &c.  p.  384.  An  account  of  the  times  when  immer- 
sion was  left  off  in  the  Latin  church  :  France  was  the  first 
country  in  Christendom  that  left  it  off:  then  Italy,  Germany, 
&e.  p.  393  ;  and  last  of  all,  England,  not  till  the  time  of  queen 
Elizabeth,  p.  399.  The  Directory  forbids  dipping,  p.  403. 
The  church  of  England  at  the  Restoration  reestablished  it,  in 
case  the  child  be  able  to  bear  it,  p.  404.  The  opinion  of  Mr. 
Mede,  bishop  Taylor,  Mr.  Rogers,  sir  Norton  KnatchbuU, 
Mr.  Walker,  Dr.  Towerson,  Dr.  Whitby,  sir  John  Floyer,  &c., 
that  the  general  use  of  it  ought  to  be  restored,  p.  407.  All 
nations  of  Christians  in  tlie  world,  except  those  that  are  or  have 
been  under  the  pope,  do  dip  tlieir  infants,  if  in  he;ilth,  p.  414. 


xii  CONTENTS  OF 

§.  3.  The  ancient  Christians  baptized  naked.  The  care  that 
was  taken  to  preserve  the  modesty  of  women,  p.  41 7.  §.  4.  The 
head  of  the  baptized  was  thrice  put  under  water  ;  once  at 
the  naming  each  name  of  the  holj'^  Trinity,  p.  419.  §.  5.  The 
forehead  was  signed  with  the  sign  of  the  cross,  p.  424.  ^.  6. 
A  mixture  of  milk  and  honey  given  to  the  new-baptized  person. 
A  quotation  out  of  the  epistle  of  Barnabas  to  that  purpose, 
p.  426.  §.  7.  The  white  garment  put  on  after  baptism,  p.  429. 
§.  8.  Of  the  two  anointings  ;  one  with  oil  before  the  baptism  ; 
the  other  with  a  rich  ointment  or  chrism  after  baptism,  toge- 
ther with  the  laying  on  of  hands  of  the  bishop,  ibid.  §.  9. 
The  professions  made  at  baptism,  both  of  the  adult  and  infants: 
and  first,  the  promise  of  renouncing  the  Devil  and  all  wicked- 
ness, p.  435.  §.  10.  The  profession  of  faith:  the  form  of  it  at 
first ;  only  to  say,  '  I  believe  in  the  Father,  and  in  the  Son,  and 
'  in  the  Holy  Spirit.'  It  was  afterwards  made  in  the  words  of 
the  creed  that  was  in  use  in  each  church.  The  copies  of  the 
most  ancient  creeds  are  lost.  The  substance  of  them  collected 
from  rules  of  faith  delivered  by  Justin  Martyr,  Irenaeus,  Ter- 
tuUian,  Origen,  Cyprian,  &c.  p.  439.  §.  i  i.  The  Nicene  creed 
the  eldest  copy  of  any  public  creed  that  is  extant.  Eusebius' 
creed  ;  the  creed  of  Alexander  ;  of  Arius  ;  of  some  Arian  coun- 
cils at  Antioch  ;  of  Eunomius.  Julian  the  apostate's  applause 
of  Photinus'  belief.  The  abhorrence  expressed  by  the  Arians, 
as  well  as  Catholics,  against  it.  All  the  Catholic  Christians  of 
the  East  used  the  Nicene  creed  at  baptism,  p.  450.  §,  12.  The 
Constantinopolitan  creed.  What  is  added  to  the  Nicene.  Of  the 
sense  of  those  words,  2  Cor.  iii.  17,  6  Kvpios  to  nvfvij.d  iari, 
p.  462.  §.13.  The  Roman  creed  :  no  copy  of  it  extant,  elder 
than  the  year  400:  what  clauses  have  been  added  to  it  since 
that  time  :  the  descent  into  hell,  &c.,  and  how  it  came  to  be 
called  the  Apostolic  creed,  or  the  Apostles'  creed,  p.  466.  §.  14. 
The  baptismal  professions  made  twice  by  the  adult ;  but  once 
in  the  case  of  infants.  Infants  never  ordinarily  baptized  with- 
out godfathers  making  profession  in  their  name,  p.  475.  §.  15. 
The  eucharist  given  quickly  after  baptism  :  always  to  the  adult, 
and  in  some  places  and  ages  of  the  church,  to  infants.  Mr. 
Daille's  charge  against  the  ancients  for  doing  this,  examined. 
No  proof  of  its  being  given  to  mere  infants,  till  after  the  year4oo. 
The  mistake  of  those  that  say  St.  Austin  calls  it  an  apostolical 
tradition,  p.  47 S.     §.  16.  This  custom  continued  in  the  church 


THE  SECOND  PART.  xiii 

of  Rome  from  400  to  1000.  It  was  then  dropt  on  account  of  the 
doctrine  of  transubstantiation  coming  up.  The  contrary  deter- 
minations of  pope  Innocent  and  pope  Pius  about  the  necessity  of 
it,  p.  487.  The  Greeks  in  later  times  took  it  from  the  Latins, 
and  not  being  disturbed  bv  the  doctrine  of  transubstantiation,  do 
practise  it  still,  p.  489.  §.  17.  The  argument  of  the  antipeedo- 
baptists  against  any  regard  to  be  given  to  the  practice  of  the  an- 
cients in  other  matters,  because  they  were  in  an  error  in  this 
matter,  proposed  and  considered,  p.  490. 

CHAP.  X. 

A  summing  up  of  the  evidence  that  has  here  been  given  on  both 
sides,  p.  493. 
§.  I.  Evidence /or  infants'  baptism,  p.  494.     §.  2.  Evidence 
against  infants'  baptism,  p.  502.     §.  3.  Evidence  that  seems  to 
make  against  infant-baptism,  but  does  not  really,  p.  508. 

CHAP.   XI. 

A  dissuasive  from  separation  on  account  of  the  difference  of  opinion 
about  the  age  or  time  of  receiving  baptism,  p.  524. 
§.  1 .  The  great  guilt  and  mischief  of  the  sin  of  schism,  p.  525. 
§.  2.  Different  opinions  in  points  not  fundamental,  no  just  cause 
of  separation.  The  fault  of  the  Romish  way  of  bringing  all  men 
to  unity,  by  forcing  them  to  subscribe  to  the  same  opinions,  and 
of  the  way  in  the  opposite  extreme  of  setting  up  several  churches 
for  the  several  opinions,  p.  527.  §.  3.  He  that  likes  some  other 
way  of  ordering  the  public  worship,  ceremonies,  &c.,  better  than 
that  which  is  established  in  the  church  where  he  lives,  is  not 
therefore  to  separate,  p.  536.  §.  4.  He  that  thinks  some  error, 
not  fundamental,  to  be  expressed  in  some  of  the  prayers, 
collects,  &c.,  ought  to  join  in  the  other  service,  though  he  can- 
not join  in  those  particular  prayers,  provided  there  be  no  idolatry 
in  any  part  of  the  worship,  p.  543.  §.  5.  In  the  Scripture- 
command  of  holding  communion  with  the  church  where  we  live, 
there  are  but  four  cases  excepted:  i.  Idolatry;  2.  False  doc- 
trine in  fundamentals  ;  3 .  The  church's  requiring  some  condition 
of  communion  that  is  sinful ;  4.  If  that  church  herself  be 
schismatical.  He  that  adds  any  more  exceptions,  adds  to  the 
Scripture,  p.  545.     §.  6.  An  error  in  opinion  about  the  age  or 


ariv  CONTENTS  OF  THE  SECOND  PART. 

manner  of  receiving  baptism,  is  not  a  fundamental  one,  p.  547. 
§.  7.  Some  difficulties  on  the  part  of  the  church  of  England  in 
receiving  antipaedobaptists  to  communion  ;  and  some  on  the 
antipaedobaptists'  side,  in  accepting  communion  with  the  said 
church,  considered.  They  are  none  of  them  such  as  to  render 
the  said  communion  impracticable,  p.  563.  An  alphabetical  table 
of  some  few  matters,  p.  577- 


THE 


HISTORY 


OF 


INFANT-BAPTISM. 


PART    II. 


THE  HISTORY 


INFANT-BAPTISM. 


PART  H. 


CHAP.  I. 

Of  some  other  Passages  which  are  cited^  and  pretended  to 
he  to  this  purpose,  hut  are  not. 

§.  I.  rpHE  passages  produced  in  the  first  part,  are  chap.  r. 
J-    all  that  I  have  met  with  in  authors  that  Year  after 
wrote  in  the   first    four  centuries  :    saving    that  in  *  }^  ^^''' 
St.  Austin's  works  there  are,  as  I  said,  a  great  many 
more ;  but  all  to  the  same  purpose. 

In  some  collections  of  this  nature  I  have  seen 
several  other  quotations  pretended  to  be  out  of 
authors  within  the  said  term.     But  they  are  either, 

1.  Out  of  such  books  as  are  now  discovered  to  be 
forgeries  of  late  years.     Or, 

2.  They  are  nothing  to  the  purpose.     Or, 

3.  Wrested  and  altered  by  those  that  cite  them  ta 
another  sense  than  what  they  carry  in  the  authors 
themselves.     Or, 

4.  Such  wherein  the  author  does  not  say  that  for 
wliich  he   is    cited  :    but    he    says    something   from 

WALL,  VOL.   II.  K 


2  Quotations  impertine7it. 

CHAP,  I.  whence  the  other  does  draw  it  as  a  consequence ; 
Year  after  and  then  sets  down  that  consequence,  as  if  it  were 
Ities!^°'     *^®  author's  own  words.     Or, 

5.  Quotations  absolutely  false. 

First,  out  of  such  books  as  are  now  discovered  to 
be  no  true  works  of  the  authors,  whose  name  they 
bear,  but  forgeries  of  later  years. 

So  there  are  quotations  for  infant  baptism,  taken 
out  of  the  Decretal  epistles,  which  have  been  set  out 
under  the  name  of  the  most  ancient  bishops  of 
730.  Rome,  but  were,  as  I  shewed  before  ^,  really  forged 
long  after  that  time.  As  for  the  spurious  quotations 
that  are  of  any  tolerable  credit  for  antiquity,  I  gave 
before  some  account  of  them  ^. 

II.  Secondly,  many  that  are  produced  are  nothing 
to  the  purpose. 

As,  when  the  antipsedobaptists  do  fill  their  col- 
lections of  this  nature  with  passages  out  of  the  an- 
cient Fathers  that  relate  to  the  baptizing  of  adult 
persons.  There  is  no  p?edobaptist,  but  does  grant 
that  there  are  innumerable  such  places  ;  for  in  the 
first  300  or  400  years  of  Christianity,  (in  which 
space  of  time  it  was  that  the  greatest  part  of  the 
heathen  world,  being  converted,  came  into  the 
church,)  the  baptisms  of  grown  persons  converted 
were  more  in  number  than  the  baptisms  of  the 
children  of  Christians  :  as  it  must  needs  be,  since 
the  apostles,  at  their  death,  left  the  world  in  such  a 
state,  as  that  there  was  probably  a  hundred  heathens 
left  for  one  Christian  ;  even  in  the  Roman  empire, 
where  they  spent  most  of  their  pains :  but  at  the 

^  Part  i.  ch.  16.  §.  i,  2.  ^  Part  i.  ch.  23. 


Quotations  impertinent.  3 

end  of  300  or  400  years,  there  were  probably  ten  chap.  i. 
Christians  for  one  heathen.  Now  in  that  space  of ye^r after 
time  there  are  recorded  a  great  many  sermons  and  ^^^  ^p°' 
other  discourses,  persuading  people  to  come  in  and 
be  baptized  :  and  in  those  discourses  they  instruct 
them  in  what  is  necessary  thereto,  as  that  they 
must  first  understand  and  believe  the  principles  of 
the  Christian  religion,  and  resolve  to  forsake  their 
wicked  courses  and  idolatrous  worships.  And  com- 
monly when  they  are  upon  this  theme,  they  speak 
of  baptism  just  as  the  church  of  England  does  in 
the  Catechism  ;  that  there  is  required  of  persons  to 
be  baptized,  repentance  and  faith.  There  are  also 
extant  many  sermons  made  to  the  persons  newly 
baptized,  putting  them  in  mind  of  their  vow  and  co- 
venant. And  it  is  common  for  the  antipasdobaptists 
to  cite  some  passages  out  of  such  discourses,  which, 
taken  by  themselves,  look  as  if  those  authors  were 
against  infant-baptism,  and  allowed  it  only  to  grown 
persons  ;  but  the  contrary  appears  in  that  the  same 
authors,  in  other  jjlaces,  when  they  speak  of  the 
case  of  infants,  do  shew  their  opinion  and  practice 
to  have  been  otherwise ;  and  that  they  looked  upon 
that  as  a  particular  and  excepted  case.  For  this 
sort  of  quotations  is  often  made  out  of  Chrysostom, 
Gregory  Nazianzen,  and  even  St.  Austin  himself 

In  short,  they  have  in  this  matter  dealt  with 
those  ancient  authors  just  as  they  did  lately  with 
Mr.  Baxter ;  who  being  busy  in  writing  something 
in  defence  of  infant-baptism,  heard  the  hawkers  cry 
under  his  window  S  '  Mr.  Baxter's  Arguments  for 
'  Believers,'   &c.    being    a    pamphlet    of  collections 

<=  Baxter,  More  Proofs  of  Infants  Church  Membership  and  right 
to  Baptism,  p.  414. 

B    2 


4  Quotations  impertinent. 

CHAP.  I.  taken  out  of  some  of  Mr.  Baxter's  works,  wherein 
Year  after  ^6,  Speaking  of  the  terms  of  the  baptismal  covenant, 
sdes?^"'  ^^^  shewn  the  necessity  of  a  justifying  faith  in  order 
to  baptism  ;  though  in  the  same  books  he  had  de- 
clared he  spoke  in  reference  to  adult  persons  only. 
On  which  occasion  Mr.  Baxter  says,  '  the  men  that 
'  cite  authors  at  this  rate,  cite  me  against  myself, 
'  with  the  like  confidence.' 

Indeed,  Mr.  Tombes  wrote  a  piece  against  Mr. 
Baxter,  called,  Felo  de  se  ^,  or.  The  Self -destroyer : 
in  which  he  endeavoured  to  shew,  that  though 
Mr.  Baxter  intended  these  proofs  of  the  necessity  of 
faith,  only  in  the  case  of  the  baptism  of  adult  per- 
sons ;  yet  '  his  arguments  prove  more  :  and  that  the 

*  middle  terms  of  his  arguments  do  beat  down  his 

•  own  tenet  of  infant-baptism.'  If  the  antipsedo- 
baptists  had  dealt  only  thus  in  their  quotations  out 
of  the  ancients ;  and  had  declared  their  purpose  to 
be,  to  improve  these  sayings  of  the  Fathers  to  con- 
fute the  opinion  and  practice  of  the  said  Fathers 
themselves ;  none  could  deny  them  the  liberty  of 
making  their  best  of  such  a  course.  And  they  may, 
if  they  think  fit,  indict  the  Fathers  of  being  Felones 
de  se.  But  it  is  common  with  them  to  cite  such 
passages,  as  evidences  that  the  authors  were  against 
infant-baptism ;  or,  that  there  was  no  baptism  of 
infants  practised  in  those  ages,  or  those  churches, 
because  they  find  such  passages  concerning  the 
baptizing  of  grown  persons,  and  concerning  the 
qualifications  required  in  them. 

Such  jDlaces  as  these  I  have  left  out,  inasmuch  as 

^  [Felo  de  se  ;  or  Baxter's  Self- destroying,  in  twenty  argu- 
ments against  Infant-baptism,  gathered  out  of  his  own  writing. 
4".  London,  1659.] 


Quotations  impertinent.  5 

they  only  prove  that  there  were  frequent  baptisms  chap.  i. 


of    adult  persons   in    those   times ;    which    nobody  Year  after 

1       •  the  apo- 

denies.  sties. 

Yet  I  shall  here  set  down  for  instance  two  of 
them,  which  do  in  appearance,  the  most  of  any 
that  I  have  met  with,  make  for  the  purpose  of  the 
antipajdobaptists. 

Basil,  contra  Eimomium,  lib.  iii.^  270. 

Tli(jT&j(jai  yap  Set  Trporepov'  eira  tm  ^airTLaixaTi 
€7ri(T(ppa'yi(jaa-6ai. 

*  For  one  must  believe  first :  and  then  be  sealed 
'  with  baptism.' 

Hieronym.  in  Matt,  xxviii.  I9.  278. 

'  Primum  docent  omnes  gentes,  deinde  doctas 
*  intingunt  aqua :  non  enim  potest  fieri  ut  corpus 
'  baptismi  recipiat  sacramentum,  nisi  ante  aninia 
'  fidei  susceperit  veritatem.' 

'  They  first  teach  all  the  nations,  then  when  they 
'  are  taught  they  baptize  them  with  water ;  for 
'  it  cannot  be  that  the  body  should  receive  the 
'  sacrament  of  baptism,  unless  the  soul  have  before 
'  received  the  true  faith.' 

St.  Hierome  here  commenting  on  the  commission 
given  by  our  Saviour  to  the  apostles  f  of  carrying 
the  gospel  to  the  nations  that  were  heathens,  ex- 
plains the  method  they  were  to  use,  viz.  first,  to 
teach  those  nations  the  Christian  religion,  and  then 
to  baptize  them ;  which  all  poedobaptists  grant  to 
be  the  method  that  ought  ever  to  be  used.  For  if 
there  be  any  nation  of  Indians  to  be  converted 
nowadays,  they  use  the  same :  and  yet,  when  they 

e    [Sect.  5.  Op.  torn.  i.  p.  276.  ed.  Benedict.  1721.] 

f  Matt,  xxviii.  19.  [Op.  torn.  vii.  p.  243.  edit.  Vallarsii.] 


6  Quotations  impertinent,  or  wrested. 

CHAP.  I.  have  converted  and  baptized  the  parents,  they  do 
Year  after  also,  at   the   parents'  desire,  baptize  what  chiklren 

the  apo-  ^ 

sties.  they  have.  And  it  is  of  such  heathen  people  or  na- 
tions that  St.  Hierome  here  speaks,  that  their  minds 
must  be  instructed  before  their  bodies  be  baptized. 

St.  Basil  is  there  proving,  against  the  heretic 
Eunomius,  the  divinity  of  the  Son  and  of  the  Holy 
Spirit,  by  this  argument ;  that  we  are  baptized  in 
the  name  of  them  as  well  as  of  the  Father,  and 
consequently  are  to  believe  in  them ;  for  that  bap- 
tism supposes  faith  in  that  Deity  in  whose  name 
the  baptism  is.  And  applying  this  to  the  case  of 
one  that  learns  the  faith  of  the  Christian,  shews 
that  he  must  be  taught  to  believe  in  Father,  Son, 
and  Holy  Spirit,  (viz.  that  each  of  these  persons  is 
God,)  or  else  ought  not  to  be  baptized  with  those 
words ;  and  that  consequently  the  Eunomians  did 
in  effect  renounce  their  baptism  by  renouncing  this 
faith.  As  there  was  no  dispute  between  the  catho- 
lics and  Eunomians  about  infant-baptism ;  so  St. 
Basil  will  appear  to  any  one  that  reads  him,  not  to 
have  had  any  thought  pro  or  co7itra^  at  that  place, 
about  it. 

But  it  happens  very  unluckily  for  the  purpose  of 
those  that  produce  these  sayings,  that  both  of  these 
Fathers  are  known  by  other  passages  to  have  owned 
infant-baptism ;  as  I  have  shewn  plainly  in  the  First 
Part  of  this  work  &. 

III.  Thirdly^  some  quotations  that  are  brought, 
are  wrested  and  altered  by  those  that  bring  them 
to  another  sense  than  that  which  they  carry  in  the 
authors  themselves. 

g   Chap.  12.  15.  19. 


Quotations  lorested,  or  altered.  7 

As  for  example :  Dan  vers  ^*  cites  out  of  EusebiusS  chap.  i. 
that    Dionysiiis    Alexanclrinus    writing    to    Sextus,  Year  after 
bishop  of  Rome,  testifies,  '  that  it  was  their  custom  ^Jj^j'?"" 
'  to    baptize    upon    profession    of    faith  ;    and    that  154. 
'  one  who  had  been  baptized  by  heretics,  not  upon 
'  profession  of  faith,  did  desire  to   be  so  baptized, 
'  accounting  his  former  for  no  baptism.' 

This,  as  it  is  liere  by  Mr.  Danvers  brought  in  and 
worded,  would  seem  to  be  an  instance  of  a  man  that 
having  been  baptized  in  infancy,  desired  now  to  be 
baptized  again.  But  that  which  Dionysius  does  there 
write,  is  in  these  words,  and  no  other^ : 

'  The  man  being  jiresent  when  some  were  bap- 
'  tized,  and  hearing  the  interrogatories  and  answers, 
'  came  to  me  weeping ;  and  falling  down  at  my  feet, 
'  confessed  and  declared,  that  the  baptism  wherewith 
'  he  had  been  baptized  by  the  heretics,  was  not  this 
'  [or  this  sort  of]  baj^tism,  nor  had  any  likeness  to 
*  this  of  ours,  but  was  full  of  impieties  and  blas- 
'  phemies.  He  said,  he  was  sore  troubled  in  con- 
'  science,  and  durst  not  presume  to  lift  up  his  eyes 
'  to  God,  for  that  he  was  baptized  with  those  profane 
'  words  and  ceremonies.' 

Now  this  is  clearly  the  case  of  a  man  that  had 
been  baptized  by  the  Valentinians,  (or  some  such 
heretics,)  who,  as  Irenseus  tells  us^,  did  not  baptize 
in  the  name  of  the  Father,  Son,  and  Holy  Spirit ; 
but  with  strange  and  profane  forms  of  words  which 
he  there  recites,  and  some  of  which  I  do  hereafter 
recite'".     All  which  is  nothing  relating  to  the  case 

^  Treatise  of  Baptism,  p.  50,  second  edit. 

i   Hist.  Eccl.  lib.  vii.  cap.  9.  ^  Apud  Eusebium,  loc.  citat. 

'  Lib.  i.  cap.  18.  [cap.  21.  edit.  Benedict.]         >"  Chap.  5.  §.  1. 


8  Quotations  wrested,  or  altered. 

CHAP.  I.  of  infant-baptism :  and  he  that  compares  the  words, 
Year  after  ^^^^  obsei've  how  foullj  they  are  quoted. 
sUes^^°"  IV.  Fourthly,  some  quotations  are  yet  more  un- 

fair: as,  when  the  autlior  cited  does  not  say  that 
for  which  he  is  cited ;  but  he  says  something  from 
whence  the  other  does  draw  it  as  a  consequence, 
and  then  sets  down  that  consequence  as  if  it  were 
the  author's  own  words. 
2/8.  Thus  Dan  vers,  in  the  foresaid  treatise"  says,  that 
St.  Hierome,  in  his  epistle  against  the  errors  of 
John  bishop  of  Jerusalem,  says,  '  that  in  the  eastern 
'  churches  the  adults  were  only  baptized ;'  and  again, 
in  his  epistle  to  Pammachius,  says,  '  that  they  are  to 
*  be  admitted  to  baptism  to  whom  it  doth  properly 
'  belong,  viz.  those  only  who  have  been  instructed  in 
'  the  faith.' 

Now  if  one  read  over  that  epistle  of  St.  Hierome's 
to  Pammachius,  against  the  errors  of  John  bishop 
of  Jerusalem,  and  all  the  other  epistles  of  his  to 
Pammachius,  (for  such  work  one  has  with  quota- 
tions set  down  after  such  a  blundering  manner,) 
there  is  no  such  thing. 

But  this  there  is":  the  said  bishop  having  said, 
that  *  in  a  certain  sermon  of  his  he  had  fully  dis- 
'  coursed  of  the  faith  and  all  the  doctrines  of  the 
'  church  :'  St.  Hierome  takes  occasion  to  reprove 
this  as  a  confident  saying,  that  he  should  pretend 
to  do  all  that  in  one  sermon :  and  then  adds,  '  We 
'  have  a  custom  to  discourse  for  forty  days  together, 

^  Treatise  of  Baptism,  p.  56. 

o  Epist.  61.  ad  Pammachium  de  erroribus,  &c.  prope  medium. 
QRather  see  St,  Jerome's  treatise,  '  Liber  contra  Joannem  Jero- 
solymitanum,'  §.  1 1, 12, 13.  — Op.  tom.ii.  p. 419,  ed.  Vallars.] 


Quotations  altered,  or  false.  9 

*  to  those  that  are  to  be  baptized,  concerning  the  chap.  i. 
'  Holy  Trinity,'  &c.  '  If  you  on  that  text  could  in  year  after 
'one    hour    discourse    of  all    the   doctrinal    points ; ^^ ^^°" 

*  what  need  is  there  to  continue  such  discourses  for 
'  forty  days  ?  But  if  you  did  recapitulate  all  that 
'  you  used  to  preach  in  the  whole  Lent,'  &c. 

There  is  also  another  passage  toward  the  end  of 
the  epistle,  where  he  thus  expostulates  with  the  said 
bishop ;  '  Do  we  divide  the  church,  who  but  a  few 
'  months   ago,   about   Whitsuntide,   (when   the    sun 

*  being  eclipsed,  people  thought  the  day  of  judg- 
'  ment   was   coming,)   did   present  forty  persons   of 

*  both  sexes,  and  several  ages,  to  your  presbyters  to 

*  be  baptized  ?  And  yet  we  had  five  presbyters  then  293. 
'  in  the  monastery,  who  might  have  done  it  by  their 

'  own  right ;  but  they  would  do  nothing  to  anger 
'  you.  Or  do  not  you  rather  divide  the  church,  who 
'  ordered  your  presbyters  at  Bethlehem,  that  they 
'  should  not  give  baptism  to  our  candidates  at 
'  Easter,  whom  we  therefore  sent  to  Diospolis  to 
'  bishop  Dionysius  to  be  baptized*!?' 

Here  is  indeed  a  plain  account  of  adult  persons 
baptized  in  those  times  ;  and  that  they  used  to  be 
catechised  all  the  Lent  before  their  baptism.  But 
he  that  shall  conclude  from  hence,  that  they  only 
were  baptized,  and  then  shall  quote  the  place  and 
set  it  down  as  St.  Hierome's  words,  [that  in  the 
eastern  churches  they  only  were  admitted  to  bap- 
tism,] is  by  no  means  to  be  trusted  with  the  quoting 
of  authors. 

V.  Fifthly,  some  of  the  quotations  brought  in 
this    case    are    absolutely   false :    and    neither    the 

<l  [Ibid.  sect.  42.] 


10  Quotations  altered,  or  false. 

CHAP.  I.  words  cited,  nor  any  like  tliem,  are  at  all   to  be 
Year  after  found  in  tlic  books  mentioned. 

sties!'"*'  ^o  Dan  vers  in  his  said  treatise  >"  cites  St.  Hilary 

^54-  for  three  several  sayings.  The  first  whereof  is  found 
in  the  book  mentioned  :  the  second  is  not ;  but  there 
is  a  sentence  to  the  same  purf)ose  in  another  book. 
These  two  are  not  so  material  as  to  need  reciting 
here.  The  third  (which  is  very  material,  if  it  were 
true)  is,  that  St.  Hilary  should  say,  '  that  all  the 
'  eastern  churches  did  only  baptize  the  adult.'  The 
book  he  seems  to  refer  to,  is  St.  Hilary's  second 
book  de  Trinitate ;  for  that  only  is  mentioned. 
But  neither  there  (nor,  as  I  am  very  confident,  any 
where  else)  does  St.  Hilary  say  any  such  thing. 

Both  these  last  quotations  out  of  St.  Hierome  and 
Hilary  are  amended  in  a  postscript  by  Dan  vers  ^ :  and 
for  eastern  he  says,  we  must  read  western. 

But  this  mends  not  the  matter,  but  makes  it 
worse  :  for  there  is  no  such  thing  said  of  either  of 
them.  Indeed  if  either  Hierome  or  Hilary,  or  any 
other  author  of  those  times,  had  said  that  it  was  the 
custom  either  of  the  eastern  church,  or  western 
church,  or  any  church  at  all,  to  baptize  only  the 
adult ;  and  the  places  where  they  said  so  could  be 
produced ;  it  would  be  a  quotation  more  for  the 
purpose  of  the  antipsedobaptists  than  any  they  have 
yet  brought. 

And  for  Mr.  Dan  vers  (after  that  Mr.  Baxter*  and 

r  Part  i.  cent.  4.  [in  the  '  Abstract  of  the  History  of  Baptism 
'  throughout  all  ages,'  prefixed  to  his  treatise.] 

s  Postscript  to  the  Baptist's  Answer  to  Wills's  Appeal  against 
Danvers. 

t  [See  Baxter's  '  More  Proofs  of  Infants,'  &c.  1675  :  the  se- 
cond part  of  which  is  a  confutation  of  the  strange  forgeries  of 
Mr.  H.  Danvers.     See  also  Wills'  '  Infant  Baptism  asserted,'  &c. 


Quotations  altered,  or  false.  11 

Mr.  Wills  had   so   publicly  challenged   him    for   a  chap,  i. 
forger    of  quotations;    and    Wills    had    put    in    an  Year  after 
appeal  to  his  own  party  against  him)  to  amend  in ^^^f^.^P''' 
a    P.  S.    to    the    answer   to    the    said   appeal   these 
quotations  by  putting  '  western'  for  '  eastern,'  as  if 
the  authors  had  really  said  so  of  one  of  them  :  this, 
if  joined  with  a  great  many   other  instances  in  the 
said  book,  was  the  boldest  attempt  upon  the  belief 
of  a  reader  that  ever  I  knew  made. 

It  would  have  been  a  very  tedious  thing  both  to 
me  and  the  reader,  to  recite  all  such  quotations,  and 
then  to  shew  the  falseness  or  mistake  of  them.    But 
instead  of  doing  that,  I  do  declare  that  all  that  I 
have  seen  that  seemed  to  be  to  the  purpose  I  have 
searched ;  and  the  search  after  such  as  have  proved 
false,  spurious,  kc.  has  cost  me  as  much  pains   as 
the  collecting  of  these  true  ones.    And  of  those  that 
I  have  so  seen  or  searched,  I  have  left  out  none  in 
this  collection  that  make  for  or  against  the  bap- 
tism of  infants,  but  such  as  are  (and,  I  think,  plain- 
ly) of  some  of  the  five  sorts  before  mentioned.     And 
if  any  one,  that  meets  with  any  other  which  I  have 
not  met  with,  will  be  so  kind  as  to  inform  me  of  it, 
by  word  or  letter,  I  will  (if  I  live  to  see  any  more 
editions  of  this  mean  work)  add  it  to  the  rest ;  and 
that  indifferently,  as  I  said,  whether  it  make  for  or 
against  pa3dobaptism :  provided  it  be  genuine,  and 
to  the  purpose,  and  out  of  authors  within  the  time 
limited. 

'  in  answer  to  H.  Danvers,  with  a  full  detection  of  his  misrepre- 
'  sentation,'  &c.  8vo.  1675.] 


12  Modern  Opinions  of  Pwdobaptism. 


CHAP.  II. 

The    Opinions    of  Modern    learned  Men,    concerning    the 
Ancient  Practice  or  Omission  of  Pcedohaptism. 

CHAP.  II.  \.\.  AS  for  what  later  authors  have  said  con- 
Year  after  cerning  the  practice  of  these  primitive  times;  it 
sties!^°  would  be  a  voluminous  work  to  collect  all  their 
opinions  or  verdicts.  Neither  would  it  answer  so 
much  pains,  to  have  the  account  of  the  modern 
writers,  as  to  what  they  judge  may  be  collected 
from  the  ancient  writings,  when  we  ourselves  have 
the  writings  themselves  to  recur  to.  Yet  it  may 
be  worth  the  while  to  spend  a  few  words  on  that 
matter  in  general. 

1.  And  first,  it  is  notorious,  that  almost  all  the 
learned  men  in  the  world  that  have  occasion  to  men- 
tion this  matter,  do  conclude  from  what  they  read, 
that  it  has  been  the  general  practice  of  the  Chris- 
tian church  fi-om  the  beginning,  to  bajitize  infants. 
To  name  any  particulars  were  endless  and  frivolous. 

2.  Some  few  (as  it  happens  in  all  matters)  are  of 
a  different  opinion  concerning  the  ancient  practice. 
And  they  are  of  two  sorts. 

Some  have  thought  that  there  was  a  time  in  the 
Christian  church  when  no  infants  were  baptized, 
but  that  paedobaptism  was  brought  in  after  a  certain 
term  of  years. 

Others,  that  baptism  of  infants  was  practised 
from  the  beginning,  but  not  universally;  but  that 
some  Christians  would  baptize  their  infant  children, 
and  others  would  not.  And  that  it  was  counted 
indifferent. 

Of  the  first  sort,  viz.  of  those  that  have  thought 


Walafridus  Strabo.  13 

that  there  was  a  time  when  no  baptism  of  infants  was  chap,  il 
used,  I  know  of  none  (besides  Mr.  Tombes  himself)  year  after 
but  Walafridus  Strabo  "  and  Ludovicus  Vives  :  unless '^^'^  ^i'°' 

sties. 

we  are  to  add  to  them  Curcella3us  and  Rigaltius. 

II.  Strabo  has  some  favour  shewed  him,  when  75°- 
he  is  reckoned  among  learned  men.  He  lived  in  a 
verj  ignorant  age  ;  and  for  those  times  might  pass 
for  a  learned  man.  He  had  read  St.  Austin's  book 
of  Confessions,  and  finding  it  mentioned  there  that 
St.  Austin  was  baptized  when  he  was  of  man's  age, 
he  seems  to  have  concluded  from  thence,  that  it  was 
in  old  time  the  general  use  for  Christians  to  defer 
their  children's  baptism  till  they  were  grown  up  : 
though  he  might  with  a  little  more  advertency  have 
found,  by  the  same  book,  that  St.  Austin's  father 
was  a  heathen  when  St.  Austin  was  born,  and  for 
many  years  after ;  and  did  not  turn  Christian,  nor 
was  baptized  himself,  till  a  little  before  he  died. 

Of  that  instance  of  St.  Austin,  and  some  others, 
I  shall  speak  in  the  next  chapter.  Strabo's  words 
are  these :  '  Libro  de  exordiis  et  incrementis  rerum 

*  ecclesiasticarum  ''j'  cap.  26. 

'  It  is  to  be  noted,  that  in  the  primitive  times  the 
'  grace  of  baptism  was  wont  to  be  given  to  those 
'  only  who  were  arrived  to  that  maturity  of  body 
'  and  mind,  that  they  could   know  and  understand 

*  what  were  the  benefits  of  baptism,  what  was  to  be 

^  [Walafridus  Strabo  was  a  Benedictine  monk,  of  the  famous 
abbey  of  Fulda  in  Germany,  and  afterwards  dean  of  St.  Gallen. 
He  died  in  or  about  the  year  849,  leaving  behind  him  several 
pieces  both  in  prose  and  poetry,  which  have  come  down  to  our 
times.] 

X  [This  work  was  published  at  Mayence,  in  the  year  1549, 
and  is  reprinted  in  the  Bibliotheca  Patrum,  tom.  xv.  Lyons 
edition,  and  tom.  ix.  p.  950,  edit.  Colon.] 


14  Walafridm  Strabo. 

CHAP.  II.'  confessed  and  believed,  and,  in  a  word,  what  was 

Year  after  '  to  bo   observod   of  tliose  that  are   regenerated  in 

sSes^^'*'     '  Christ.     For  the  reverend  Father  Austin  relates  of 

'  himself  in  his  book  of  Confessions,  that  he  con- 

'  tinned   a  catechumen  till  he  was  almost  twenty- 

'  five  years  old  :  which   he  did  with  that  intention, 

288. '  that  during  that  space   being  instructed  in  all  par- 

'  ticulars,  he  might   be  led   by  his  own   freewill   to 

'  choose  what  he  thought  fit ;  and  that  the  heat  of 

'  his  youth  being  now  abated,  he  might  better  ob- 

'  serve  that  which  he  had  purposed. 

'  But  when  the  diligence  about  our  divine  religion 

*  increased  ;  the  Christians  understanding  that  the 
'  original  sin  of  Adam  did  involve  in  guilt,  not  only 
'  those  who  had  added  to  it  by  their   own   wicked 

*  works,  but  those  also  who  having  done  no  wicked- 
'  ness  themselves,  yet  because  (as  the  Psalmist  says) 

*  they  were  conceived  and   born  in  iniquity ,  cannot 

*  be  free  from  sin,  since  they  spring  from  a  polluted 

*  root ;  so  that  the  aj^ostle  had  reason  to  say  con- 
^  corning  all  persons,  All  have  sinned,  and  have 
'  need  ^  of  the  glory  of  God,  being  justified  freely  by 

*  his  grace;  and  to  say  of  Adam,  In  whom  all  have 
'  sinned : — the  orthodox  Christians,  I  say,  under- 
'  standing  this,  lest  children  should  perish  if  they 
'  died  without  the  remedy  of  the  grace  of  regenera- 

*  tion,  appointed  them  to  be  baptized  for  the  for- 
'  giveness  of  sins. 

'  Not   as  some   heretics,   enemies  of  God's   free 

*  grace,  maintained,  that  there  was  no  necessity  for 

*  infants'   baptism,  because   they  had   never  sinned- 

*  If  that  doctrine  were  true,  either  they  would  not 
'  be   baptized   at   all ;    or,    if  they   were    baptized 

"  {_have  need.    The  expression  used  by  Strabo  is  egent.'] 


Walafridus  Strabo.  15 

*  without  having  any  need  of  it,  the  sacrament  of  chap,  ir. 
'  baptism  would  be  imperfect  in  them,  and  not  the  year  after 

*  true  baptism  which  we   in  the  creed  confess  to  be  Jf^f^" 
'  given  for  the  forgiveness  of  sins. 

'  Therefore  since  all  persons  do  perish  by  original 
'  sin,  whom  the  grace  of  God  does  not  free,  (even 
'  such  as  have  added  no  increase  of  their  own  wick- 
'  edness,)  infants  are  of  necessity  to  be  baptized. 
«  Which  both  St.  Austin  shews  in  his  book  de  Bap- 
'  tisino  Parvulorum,  and  the  African  councils  tes- 
'  tify,  and   is   manifested   by   a   great   many   other 

*  proofs  from  the  other  Fathers.' 

This  man,  with  his  little  reading,  seems  to  have  3' s- 
supposed  that  both  the  doctrine  of  pajdobaptism, 
and  also  that  of  original  sin,  had  their  beginning 
but  about  St.  Austin's  time.  His  mistake  in  the 
first  may  appear  by  the  quotations  here  produced ; 
and  in  the  other,  by  those  mentioned  by  Vossius  ^  in 
his  Pelagian  History.  He  also  invents  a  reason  for 
St.  Austin  s  delay  of  his  baptism  after  he  was  grown 
up,  which  is  utterly  contrary  to  St.  Austin's  own 
account;  who  relates  at  large  in  that  his  book  of 
Confessions,  that  it  was  because  he  was  in  suspense 
whether  he  should  be  a  Christian  or  a  Manichee  ^ 
He  miserably  mistakes  the  doctrine  of  the  Pelagians, 
as  if  they  had  denied  infants'  baptism  to  be  neces- 
sary. He  himself  owns  it  to  be  necessary  ;  and  yet 
says  that  the  ancients  used  it  not. 

But  indeed  there  appears  through  all  his  book  an 

y  [G.  I.  Vossius,  Historia  de  Controversiis  quae  Pelagius  ejusque 
reliquife  moverunt ;  editio  secunda,  emendata  et  aucta,  40.  Amst. 
1655.    See  particularly  the  second  book.] 

z  [August.  Confession,  lib.  v.  cap.  14.  §.  25.~Op.  torn.  1. 
p.  118.] 


16  Ludovicus  Vives. 

CHAP.  II.  affectation  to  shew  how  all  the  doctrines  and  myste- 
Year  after  ries  of  the  Christian  religion  have  come  to  more  and 
sUes^^'^'     iriore  perfection  by  process  of  time;  as  he   makes 

the  title  of  his  book  to  be,  '  Of  the  beginning  and 

'  advancement  of  ecclesiastical  matters.'   And  he  was 

willing  to  say  some  such  thing  of  baptism,  that  this 

chapter  might  be  like  the  rest. 
1422.      III.  What  Ludovicus  Vives  ^  says  of  this  matter, 

is  in  his  commentaries  upon    St.  Austin's  book  de 

Civitate  Dei,  lib.  i.  cap.  27- 

'  In  former  times  no  person  was  admitted  to  the 

'  holy  font,  till  he  were  of  age,  and  did  understand 

*  what  that  mystical  water  meant,  and  did  himself 

*  desire  to  be  washed  with  it,  and  did  express  this 
'  desire  more  than  once.  A  resemblance  of  which 
'  custom  we  see  still  in  our  baptisms  of  infants.     For 

*  an  infant  born  that  day,  or  the  day  before,  is  asked 
'  the  question,  whether  he  will  be  baptized  ?  And 
'  that  question  they  ask  three  times  over.  In  whose 
'  name  the  godfathers  answer,  that  he  does  desire  it. 
'  I  hear  that  in  some  cities  of  Italy  the  old  custom  is 
'  still  in  great  measure  preserved.' 

3  [John  Louis  Vives,  a  learned  Spaniard,  was  born  at  Va- 
lencia, in  the  year  1492.  Having  studied  at  Paris  and  Louvain, 
and  obtained  a  high  reputation  for  learning,  he  was  appointed 
by  bishop  Fox  one  of  the  fellows  of  his  college  of  Corpus 
Christi,  at  Oxford  ;  here  he  continued  for  some  time^was  admitted 
a  doctor  of  law,  and  read  lectures  in  that  and  the  belles  lettres. 
His  commentary  on  St.  Austin's  work,  *  De  Civitate  Dei,'  was 
first  published  in  1522,  with  a  dedication  to  king  Henry  VHI.  . 
it  was  reprinted  in  1622,  1661,  and  is  found  in  some  collections 
of  that  Father's  works. 

Vives  subsequently  falling  under  Henry's  displeasure,  in  the 
matter  of  the  royal  divorce,  was  imprisoned  for  some  time ;  but 
recovering  his  liberty  quitted  England  for  Bruges  in  the  Nether- 
lands, where  it  is  thought  he  ended  his  days,  in  1537,  or  1541.] 


Curcellwm.  17 

Since  this  Vives  lived  so  little  while  ago,  and  chap.  ii. 
produces  no  proof  out  of  any  author  to  confirm  his  year  after 
opinion;  his  affirming  any  thing  concerning  any  old*,gj^^'°' 
custom  is  of  no  more  authority,  than  if  any  one  now 
living   should  say  the   same  without   producing   his 
proof.     Especially  since  he  was  but  a  young  man 
when  he  wrote  these    commentaries,  and,    though 
learned   in  philology   and  secular  history,  yet  con- 
fesses himself  in   his  preface   to  them,  that  as  for 
divinity,    which    was    none    of    his    profession,    he 
minded  it  only  so  far  as  his  other  studies  would  give 
him  leave. 

It  is  certain  that  the  occasion  given  him,  from 
St.  Austin's  words,  on  which  he  there  comments,  to 
say  any  such  thing,  is  very  slender.  For  St.  Austin 
is  only  speaking  of  some  baptized  at  the  age  of  un- 
derstanding, without  the  least  intimation  that  they 
were  children  of  Christian  parents. 

And  for  the  cities  of  Italy  that  he  mentions,  I 
think  nobody  ever  heard  of  them  before,  nor  since : 
unless  we  will  suppose  that  some  remainders  of  the 
Petrobrusians,  who  are  said  about  400  years  before  1050. 
Vives'  time  to  have  been  antip9edoba])tists,  and  of 
whom  I  shall  by  and  by  give  some  account'',  might 
continue  that  practice  in  some  of  the  valleys  of 
Piedmont.  But  if  it  were  so,  these  men  were  too 
late,  for  any  opinion  concerning  the  ancient  practice 
to  be  founded  on  what  they  did. 

IV.  Curcellneus^   says  the  same    thing    as  Vives  1550. 
does.     And  there  is  to  be  said  of  him  not  only  what 
was  said  of  Vives,  that  affirming  a  thing  of  antiquity, 

b  Chap.  vii.  §.5. 

^  [See  Stepliani  Curcellsei  Opera  Theologica,  fol.  Arast.  1675, 
p.  91 2.] 

WALL,  VOL.   I.  C 


18  Rigaltius. 

CHAP.  11.  he  produces  no  quotation  for  proof,  but  also  that  he 
Year  after  brings  it  ill  to  maintain  another  tenet  as  paradoxical 
stie/^°'  as  this  itself  is.  He  has  a  '  Dissertation  concerning 
'  Original  Sin.'  He  denies  that  there  is  any  such 
thing;  as  most  that  are  inclined  to  Socinianism  do. 
He  brings  as  an  objection  against  his  own  doctrine, 
the  custom  of  baptizing  infants  for  forgiveness  of 
sin.  He  answers^,  '  that  the  custom  of  baptizing 
'  infants  did  not  begin  before  the  third  century  after 
'  Christ's  birth;  that  in  the  first  two  there  appear 
'  no  footsteps  of  it.' 

Whether  that  be  true  or  no,  will  be  partly  judged 
by  what  I  have  here  produced.  It  is  best  for  any 
one  that  cannot  prove  what  he  says,  to  affirm  it 
dictator-like. 
i5;8.  V.  It  is  doubtful  in  wliich  of  the  two  foremen- 
tioned  sorts,  of  those  that  have  thought  the  practice 
of  infant-baptism  to  have  been,  either  not  from  the 
beginning,  or  not  universal,  one  is  to  place  Ri- 
galtius*^. He,  in  his  annotations  on  those  places  of 
St.  Cyprian,  which  I  recited  in  the  former  part  of 
this  work  ^,  seems  willing  to  have  it  believed,  that  in 
the  apostles'  time  there  was  no  psedobaptism  ;  but 
not  willing  to  speak  this  plainly. 

His  discourse  of  this  matter  from  texts  of  scrip- 
ture is  too  large  to  repeat  here  :  he  uses  no  argu- 
ments but  those  that  are  common,  and  have  their 
answers  as  common. 
'  §•  56. 

e  [Nicolaus  Rigaltius  published  an  edition  of  St.  Cyprian's 
works  at  Paris,  in  164S,  folio.  His  notes  were  retained  in  the 
subsequent  ones,  of  Priorius,  Paris,  1666,  and  bishop  Fell, 
Oxford,  1682.  They  are  noticed,  but  not  given  at  length,  in  the 
Benedictine  edition,  fol.  Paris,  1726.] 

'  Part  i.  ch.  6.  §.  i,  and  1 1. 


mgaliius.  19 

But  what  he  speaks  plainly  of  the  matter  of  fact,  chap.  ii. 
as  he  takes  it  to   have  been,  is  this^:   'From   the  Year  after 
'  age  of  the  apostles  to  the  time  of  Tertullian,  the  Jj^^^i*"- 
'  matter  continued   in  ombiguo,  doubtful,    [or  vari-  'oo- 

*  ous].  And  there  were  some,  who  on  occasion  of 
'  our  Lord's  saying,  Sujfer  little  cJiildren  to  come 
'  to  me,  (though  he  gave  no  order  to  baptize  them,) 
'  did  baptize  even  new-born  infants  ;  and,  as  if  they 

*  vfere  transacting  some  secular  bargain  with  God 
'  Almighty,  brought  sponsors  and  bondsmen  to  be 
'  bound  for  them,  that  when  they  were  grown  up 
'  they  should  not  depart  from  the  Christian  faith. 
'  Which  custom  Tertullian  did  not  like.  For, 
'  "  what  need  is  there,"  says  he,  "  that  the  god- 
'  fathers  should  be  brought  into  danger,"  &c.  [and 
'  so  he  recites  at  large  the  place  of  Tertullian, 
'  which    I    produced    above  g^,    and    then   proceeds,] 

'  Most    men,    thinking    this    opinion    of  Tertullian  150. 
'  unsafe,  were  of  St.  Cyprian's  mind,  that  even  new- 
'  born  children  ought  to  be  made  partakers  of  the 
'  laver   of  salvation  ;   which  was  also  pitched  upon 

*  in  the  decree  of  this  synod ;  and  so  the  doubt  was 
'  taken  away.' 

And  in  his  annotations  on  the  other  place  of  St. '5°- 
Cyprian^',  he  passes  this  censure  upon  the  practice 
of  those  times.     'They  gave  the  sign  of  faith  to  a 

*  person  before  he  was  capable  of  faith  itself:  they 
'  made  the  sign  without  the  thing,  to  stand  instead 
'  of  the  thing  itself.' 

f  Annot.  in  Cypriani  Epistolam  ad  Fidum.  [scil.  epvst.  59,  in 
editt.  Rigaltii  et  Renedictin.  64,  in  edit.  Fellii,  1682.] 

o  Part  i.  chap.  4.  §.  5. 

li  Lib.  de  Lapsis.  [See  Rigaltii  observationeg,  p.  159.  edit. 
1648  :  p.  125,  edit.  Oxon.] 

c  2 


20  Rigaltius. 

CHAP.  II.      The  zealous  bishop  of  Oxford,  who  since  wrote 

Year  after  annotatioiis  Oil  the  same  Father's  works,  and  who 

theapo-     generally  treats  Rigaltius   with  that  respect   which 

his  great  learning    deserves ;    yet  on  this    account 

spares  not  to  sayS  '  that  he  has  in  this  matter  acted 

'  the  part,  not  of  an  annotator  on  St.  Cyprian,  but  a 

*  prevaricator  with  him  :'  and  that  '  what  he  says  here, 
'  is  no   other  sort  of  stuff  than  what  some  fanatic 

*  of  the  anabaptist  crew  would  have  said.' 

Indeed  it  is  a  wonder,  that  since  he  knew  that 
which  he  would  insinuate  (that  there  was  no  bap- 
tism of  infants  in  the  apostles'  time)  to  be  contrary 
to  the  sentiments  of  all  the  learned  men  in  the 
world ;  he  should  so  take  it  for  granted  on  the  ordi- 
nary pretences,  without  taking  notice  of  what  they 
gay  in  answer.  And  that  he  should  conclude,  that  in 
the  next  century  of  years,  which  passed  from  the 
apostles'  to  Tertullian's  time,  it  was  held  and  prac- 
tised variously  or  indifferently;  only  because  Ter- 
tullian  spake  against  what  was  then  done  about  it : 
when  almost  all  learned  men  do  take  that  opposition 
of  his  for  no  evidence  that  the  delay  of  infants' 
baptism,  or  virgins'  baptism,  or  widows'  baptism, 
was  then  practised  by  any  body,  (neither  does  Ter- 
tuUian  pretend  it  was,)  but  only  for  an  evidence 
that  Tertullian  was  a  man  of  a  singular  opinion  in 
this,  as  well  as  in  forty  other  things  that  were  then 
practised  or  taught.  Neither  can  Tertullian  him- 
self be  well  understood  to  have  advised  that  delay, 
but  only  when  there  is  no  danger  of  death '^j  which 
in  the  case  of  infants  is  very  seldom. 

This  annotator  is  also  partial  in  the  account  he 

i  [See  Fell's  edition,  part  i.  p.  i  25  ;  and  part  ii.  p.  159.] 
^  See  the  place,  part  i.  chap.  4.  §.5,  7. 


Rigaltius.  21 

gives   of   the    writers   of  this    century :  in   that   he  chap.  ii. 
mentions  Tertullian,  who  wrote  at  the  latter  end  of  yg^r  after 
it,  and  gives  his  opinion  against  the  ordinary  prac- ^^ '^^''' 
tice  of  psedobaptism  ;  without  taking  any  notice  of  loo- 
Irena-us,  who  wrote  in  the  middle  of  it,  and  speaks 
of  infants,   as    being    ordinarily   baptized,   or    rege- 
nerated ;  or  of  Origen,  who  was  contemporary  with  67. 
Tertullian,  and  wrote  but  a   little   after  him  ;  and 
who    having    travelled    in    all    the    noted    churches  I'o- 
then  in  the  world,  speaks  of  their  baptism  both  as 
being  generally  practised,  and  also  appointed  by  the 
apostles. 

It  is  plain  that  the  place  on  which  he  there  com- 
ments, does  shew  that  the  baptism  of  infants  was 
then  looked  on  as  undoubted,  and  (as  he  would  re- 
present) that  '  the  doubt  about  it  was  then  taken  ^so- 
'  away,'  or  solved.  For  Fidus,  who  doubted  whe- 
ther they  might  be  baptized  before  the  eighth  day, 
and  St.  Cyprian  and  his  fellow  bishops,  who  resolved 
that  doubt,  had  both  of  them  taken  it  for  undoubted, 
that  they  are  to  be  baptized  in  infancy ^ 

This  partiality  shewn  by  him  for  the  antipoedo- 
baptists'  side,  makes  one  have  the  less  opinion  of 
his  fidelity  in  that  alteration  which  he  has  made  in 
their  favour,  in  the  text  of  Tertullian's  book  of  bap- 
tism, in  his  edition  thereof;  which  does  much  alter 
the  sense,  and  of  which  I  gave  an  account  when  I 
recited  the  place".  I,  though  I  knew  it  was  other- 
wise in  Pamelius'  edition,  and  that  Pamelius  testifies 
his  edition  to  agree  with  Gaigneus  (who  first  pub- 
lished this  book  of  Tertullian)  in  that  place ;  yet 
was  of  opinion   that   so  learned   a  man  would   not 

1  See  the  place,  part  i.  chap.  6.  §.  i,  &c. 
m  Part  i.  chap.  4.  §.  8. 


22  Bishop  Taylor. 

CHAP.  II.  have  altered  the  words  without  some  good  authority 
Year  after  f^"^"^  ^^®  luanuscripts  ;  aud  I  set  them  down  accord- 
the  apo-  ingly.  But  since  he  quotes  no  manuscripts  to  con- 
firm that  alteration ;  and  besides,  shews  himself 
otherMHse  to  have  such  a  bias  :  I  do  now  think  it 
were  proper  for  learned  men  to  examine  better  how 
much  credit  is  to  be  given  to  that  amendment,  which 
makes  Tertullian  advise  the  delay  of  baptism  abso- 
lutely,  which  in  the  first,  and  some  following  edi- 
tions, was  expressed,  except  in  case  of  necessity, 
P.S.  And  I  find  already  that  Mr.  Stennet,  a  learned 
antipgedobaptist,  is  convinced  that  no  credit  is  to  be 
given  to  it.  For  he  quotes  the  place  as  it  stood  in 
the  former  editions,  '  Quid  enim  necesse  est,  si  non 
'  tam  necesse,  sponsores,'  &c.  '  For  what  need  is 
'  there,  except  in  case  of  necessity,  that  godfathers,' 
&c.  in  his  Answer  to  Mr.  Russen,  chap.  iv.  p.  76. 

VI.  There  were  no  need  of  mentioning  bishop 
Taylor  among  these,  were  it  not  for  some  impor- 
tunate antipaedobaptists,  who  cite  him  in  this  con- 
troversy against  his  will.  lie,  in  the  times  of  the 
rebellion  in  England,  (when  the  parliamentarians, 
though  divided  among  themselves  into  several  sects, 
did  all  join  in  oppressing  those  of  the  church  of 
England,)  wrote  a  treatise  called,  TJie  Liberty  of 
Prophesying:  in  which  he  pleaded  that  they,  how 
earnest  soever  they  were  in  maintaining  the  truth 
of  their  opinions,  yet  ought  to  grant  a  toleration  to 
those  that  differed  from  them ;  because  many  other 
opinions  had  at  least  a  probability,  such  as  might 
well  sway  the  conscience  of  a  great  many  honest 
inquirers  after  truth. 

And  among  the  rest  he  undertook"  to  shew  how 
"  Sect.  17,  1 8. 


Bishop  Taylor.  23 

much  might  be  said  for  two  sorts  of  dissenters,  the  chap.  ii. 
antipffidobaptists    and    the    papists :    saying    thus ;  vear  after 

*  These    two    are   the   most   tronblesome   and   most  '^'f  ''p**' 

sties. 

'  disliked :  and  by  an  account  made  of  these  we 
'  may  make  judgment  what  may  be  done  towards 
'  others,   whose   errors   are   not   apprehended   of  so 

*  great  mah'guity.' 

And  in  his  plea  for  the  antipsedobaptists,  though 
he  there  declares  himself  well  satisfied  with  the 
principles  of  paedobaptism,  of  which  he  gives  a  sum- 
mary account,  and  says,  that  he  '  takes  the  other 
'  opinion  to  be  an  error;'  yet  under  pretence  of  re- 
citing what  luay  be  said  for  that  error,  he  draws 
up  so  elaborate  a  system  of  arguments  against  in- 
fant-baptism, and  sets  them  forth  to  the  utmost,  by 
such  advantage  of  style,  that  he  is  judged  to  have 
said  more  for  the  antipaedobaptists  than  they  were 
ever  before  able  to  say  for  themselves.  And  Dr. 
Hammond  says,  '  It  is  the  most  diligent  collection, 
'  and  the  most  exact  scheme  of  the  arguments 
'  against  infant-bai)tism,  that  he  had  ever  met 
'  with".  And  that  he  has  therein  in  such  manner 
'  represented  the  arguments  for  and  against  it,  that 
'  the  latter  have  seemed  to  many  to  be  successful 
'  and  victorious  P.' 

It  is  generally  supposed  that  he  did  this  with  a 
politic  intention  (commonly  practised  by  those  of 
the  church  of  Rome)  to  divide  the  adversaries  of  the 
church  of  England  among  themselves  ;  and  to  that 
end  put  arguments  into  the  mouths  of  one  sect,  in 
order  to  puzzle  the  others.  A  sort  of  prevaricating 
in  the  things  of  God,  which  few  protestants  or 
sincere   Christians   will   account  justifiable    on    any 

o   8ix  Queries,  Infant  Baptism,  §.  49.  P  Ibid.  §.  139. 


24  Bishop  Tai/hr,  and  Dr.  Hammond. 

CHAP.  II.  account  whatever.     Therefore   Dr.  Hammond,   who 
Year  after  ^^^  ^00  great  a  lover  of  sincerity  to  approve  of  such 
sties^^°      a  method,  quickly  wrote  an  answer  to  this  piece, 
solving  each  objection  particularly •!. 

And  afterward,  bishop  Taylor  himself,  having 
premised  that  he  was  sorry  if  any  one  had  been 
so  weak  as  to  be  misled  by  such  mean  objections, 
and  that  he  counted  it  great  charity  and  condescen- 
sion in  Dr.  Hammond  to  bestow  an  answer  on  them, 
wrote  also  his  own  answers  to  his  own  objections, 
and  inserted  them  in  a  later  edition  of  the  said  trea- 
tise»'  ;  and  in  another  treatise,  called  '  The  Consi- 
'  deration  of  the  Church  in  baptizing  the  Children  of 
'  Believers.'  He  does  also,  in  his  '  Great  Exemplar,' 
and  in  his  Ductor  Duhitantium^  expressly  declare 
his  opinion,  and  affirm,  that  '  it  is  necessary  that 
'  infants  be  baptized ;'  and  reckons  *  infant-baptism, 
'  and  the  keeping  of  the  Lord's  day,  among  those 
'  things  that  are  confirmed  by  this  rule.' 

Whatsoever  the  catholic  church  has  kept  in  all 
ages  by-gone,  may  rightly  be  believed  to  have 
descended  from  the  apostles. 

'  Which,'  he  says,  '  is  a  good  rule  for  rituals, 
'  [among  which  he  reckons  baptism,]  though  not 
'  for  matter  of  doctrine.'  The  reason  of  which 
distinction  he  had  given  before*.  '  Because  there  is 
'  no  doctrine  so  delivered  but  what  is  in  scripture : 

q  [See  his  Letter  of  resolution  to  Six  Queries  ;  Qu.  4.  sect.  49, 
to  the  end. — Han-smond's  Works,  vol.  i.] 

<•  [Viz.  all  which  follows  the  clause  marked  33  in  the  folio 
editions  ;  in  some  modern  ones  this  portion  is  placed  by  itself,  as 
an  appendix.] 

s  Book  ii.  chap.  3.  rule  14  :    §.  41  :   also  rule  18.  §.  i. 

t  See  rule  14.  §.  38  to  44. 


Bishop  Taylor,  and  Dr.  Hammond.  25 

*  indeed  some  practices  and  rituals  are.    Because  the  chap.  ii. 
'  public  exercises  and  usages  of  the   church  being  Year  after 

*  united    and    notorious,    public     and    acted,    might  ^^^j^^^p"- 
'  make  the  rule  evident  as  the  light.' 

Notwithstanding  all  which,  it  is  a  common  thing 
with  the  antipsedobaptists  to  cite  the  passages  in 
that  treatise  of  the  '  Liberty  of  Pro])hesying'  that 
make  for  them,  as  if  they  had  been  spoken  by  the 
author  from  his  own  judgment,  and  had  never  been 
answered  by  him. 

There  is  not  much  said  either  in  the  objections 
or  answers  about  this  point  of  antiquity  :  they  being 
chiefly  taken  from  scripture.  What  he  has  is  mostly 
from  Grotius. 

He  objects  '^  that  '  all  arguments  from  tradition 
'  are  much  decried  by  protestants  in  other  cases, 
'  and  therefore  ought  not  to  be  made  use  of  in 
'  this.' 

To  which  Dr.  Hammond  and  he  answer,  that 
'  protestants  did  never  renounce  the  arguments 
'  from  tradition  in  general :  but,  on  the  contrary, 
'  whatever  appears  to  be  the  tradition  of  the  apo- 
'  sties,  or  to  be  the  practice  of  the  Christians  in 
*  those  first  times,  they  willingly  own.  And  that  what 
'  they  decry,  is  either  the  traditions  of  later  times, 
'  or  else  the  false  pretences  to  the  elder  ones.' 

He  had  objected  likewise,  that  there  is  but  a  no. 
weak  proof  of  any  such  tradition,  and  that  '  whereas 
'  Origen  says,  that  the  apostles  gave  order  to  the 
'  churches  that  they  should  baptize  their  infants, 
'  and  St.  Austin  says  the  same ;  yet  that  probably 
'  St.  Austin  took  this  from  Origen's  writings :  and 
'  so  it  depends  on  Origen's  single  testimony.'  290. 

"  Liberty  of  Prophesying,  sect.  18.  §.  25. 


26  Bishop  Taylor^  and  Dr.  Hammond. 

CHAP.  II.      At  which    rate  of  arguing,  if  forty  had  said   it, 
Vear  alter  0^6    might    protond    that    probably    thirty-nine    of 
sties!'"'"      them  had  it  from  the  first ;  and  so  there  were  but 
one  single  evidence. 

But  he,  as  well  as  Dr.  Hammond,  answers,  that 
^rlrenaeus,  and  the  author  of  the  Questions  in  the 
name  of  Justin  Martyr,  and  abundance  of  others, 
'  (though  they  do  not  speak  expressly  of  the  apo- 
'  sties  appointing  it,  yet,)  do  confirm  it  to  have  been 
*  the  practice  in  those  times.'  To  which  I  have 
2  74-  added  a  testimony  of  St.  Ambrose  ^,  that  speaks 
expressly  of  the  apostles'  times. 

The  bishop  also  knew,  or  might  have  known, 
that  St.  Austin  was  no  reader  of  Grig-en's  works. 

He   objected,    moreover,    that    pa^dobaptisni   was 

first  established  by  canon  of  the  Milevitan  council, 

(as  he  calls  it ;  meaning  that  canon  of  the  council  of 

Carthage,  which  I  recited,  part  i.  ch.  19.  §■  37,)  in 

318.  the  year  of  Christ,  418.     So  he  dates  it. 

But  both  he  and  Hammond  answer  that,  to  this 
effect :  that  since  it  was  the  known  custom  of  the 
primitive  church,  to  make  canons  only  about  jjoints 
that  had  been  questioned  by  heretics  ;  it  is  a  great 
proof  that  this  had  never  been  questioned,  (as  St. 
Austin  concludes  it  was  from  the  beginning,  be- 
cause '  not  instituted  by  councils,')  for  none  can 
deny  that  it  was  a  common  practice  long  before. 

And  I  think  I  have  shewed  it  also  to  be  a  mis- 
take to  think  that  it  was  then  decreed  that  infants 
should  be  baptized  ;  whereas  the  decree  was,  that 
they  are  in  a  true  meaning  baptized  for  '  forgive- 
'  ness  of  original  sin,'  (which  the  Pelagians  denied  ; 
but  their  baptism  they  denied  not,)  and  that  they 
"  Part  i.  ch.  13.  §.  1. 


Bishop  Barloiv.  27 

may  be  baptized  before  the  eighth  clay,  when  new-  chap.  ii. 
born  ;   of  which  some  in  Africa  doubted  y.  Year  after 

He  had  also,  in  his  plea  for  the  antipa?dobaptists,  ^Jjg^^P''" 
cited  the  canon  of  the  Neociesarean  council,  Avhich  I  ^'4- 
recited,  ]iart  i.  ch.  8.  §.  1.  and    had   drawn  from   it 
reasons   against    infant-baptism,   such    as    are   there 
reheai*sed. 

And  the  answer  which  he  and  Dr.  Hammond 
make,  is  in  substance  the  same  that  is  there  also 
given. 

Yet  after  all  this,  this  bishop  is  to  be  reckoned 
among  the  second  sort,  that  I  mentioned,  of  those 
that  have  denied  the  practice  of  infant-baptism  to 
have  been  general  or  universal  in  the  primitive 
times  ;  as  appears  by  his  later  works,  which  I  shall 
have  occasion  to  cite  when  I  speak  of  that  second 
sort  of  men. 

VH.  It  is  tedious  to  spend  time  in  speaking  of 
Dr.  Barlow,  the  late  bishop  of  Lincoln.  What  he 
had  said  on  this  subject,  (of  which  the  antipsedo- 
baptists  do  so  serve  themselves,  that  one  shall  see 
his  name  brought  in  twenty  times  by  some  one  of 
their  writers,)  he  himself  fairly  recanted. 

He  had,  in  those  hopeful  times  that  were  in  Eng-  1556. 
land,  in  the  year  1656,  wrote  a  letter  to  Mr.  Tombes, 
wherein  he  had  said  thus :  '  I  do  believe  pa^dobap- 
'  tism  (how,  or  by  whom,  I  know  not)  came  into  the 
'  world  in  the  second  century ;  and  in  the  third  and 

*  fourth  began  to  be  practised  (though  not  gene- 
'  rally)  and  defended  as  lawful  from  the  text  grossly 
'  misunderstood,  John  iii.  5.     Upon   the   like  gross 

*  mistake  of  John  vi.  53.  they  did  for  many  centu- 
'  ries,  both  in  the  Greek  and  Latin  church,  commu- 

y  See  the  Canon,  Tart  i.  ch.  19.  §.  37. 


28  Ahhot  de  Bill. 

CHAP.  II. '  nicate  infants,  and  give  them  the  Lord's  Supper. 

Year  after  '  And  I  do  confess  thej  might  do  both  as  well  as 

S::-"-     'either.- 

1573-  This  letter  being  handed  among  the  antipaedo- 
baptists  came  afterward  to  be  printed'-,  to  the  said 
doctor's  great  discredit,  who  was  now  Margaret  pro- 
fessor in  the  university  of  Oxford,  and  accounted 
a  very  learned  man. 
'575-  Therefore  in  the  year  1675,  he  wrote  a  letter  to 
Mr.  Wills  with  consent  that  it  should  be  published, 
in  which  he  says  thus  :    '  I  acknowledge  that  such 

*  words  as  are  cited  by  Mr.  Danvers  (and  such 
'  others,  spoke  and  writ  then,  with  more  confidence 

*  than  judgment  or  discretion)  are  in  that  letter ; 
'  which  had  been  secret  still,  if  some  had  not  be- 
'  trayed  that  trust  which  was  reposed  in  them. 
'  Lastly,  it  is  to  be  considered,  that  that  letter  was 
'  writ  about  twenty  years  ago,  (when  I  talked  more, 

*  and  understood  less,)  and  yet  whatever  doubts  or 
'  objections  I  had  then  against  infant-baptism,  I 
'  never  thought  them  so  considerable  as  to  warrant 

*  any  division,  or  schismatical  disturbance  of  the 
'  peace  of  my  mother  the  church  of  England.     And 

*  therefore  I  did  then,  and  since,  and  (when  I  have  a 
'just  call,  God  willing)  ever  shall,  baptize  infants V 

VIII.  I  am   unwilling   to    name    Bilius  ^  among 

z  In  Danvers'  Treatise  of  Baptism,  cent.  4.     [Part  i.  chap.  7. 

P-  63-] 

a  Wills'  Infant  Baptism  farther  vindicated,  p.  88.  8vo. 
1675. 

^  [Jacques  de  Billi,  a  learned  French  abbot  of  the  sixteenth 
centurVj  distinguished  himself  by  a  Latin  version  of  the  works  of 
Gregory  Nazianzen,  which  was  pubhshed  under  his  own  eye  in 
1569,  again  in  1570,  1583,  &c.  and  is  retained  in  Morell's 
edition,  Paris  1609,  and  1630. 

The 


Salmasius.  ^9 

these :    because  I  believe  that  was   not  his  steady  chap.  ii. 
opinion,  which  may  seem  to   be  the    most  obvious  Year  after 
sense  of  an  expression  of  his  in  his  commentary  on*^^^j^^P°' 
the  nineteenth  oration  of  Gregory  Nazianzen  ;  where 
there    is    an    account    of   the    baptism  of  the    said 
Gregory's    father,    which    was    after    his    marriage. 
And  Bilius  there  speaking  of  the  danger  of  sinning 
after    baptism,    says ;    '  I    mention  this,  because  in 
'  those  times  persons  came  later   to    baptism    than 
'  nowadays  ;  when  by  a  commendable  custom  they 
'  are   baptized  in    infancy,   lest  delay  should    bring 
'  danger  with  it.' 

What  a  word  did  that  learned  abbot  suffer  to 
escape  the  hedge  of  his  lips  ?  Was  not  that  Gregory 
the  Father  a  heathen  till  that  time,  and  his  parents 
before  him?  I  believe  if  one  were  to  look  over 
Bilius'  writings,  one  should  find  that  this  Avas  not 
his  settled  opinion.  But  I  have  not  time  to  do  that 
at  present. 

Since  the  first  edition  of  this  book,  one  Antony 
van  Dale*',  a  Dutch  Minnist  or  antipajdobaptist,  has 
written  a  tract  called,  The  History  of  Baptisms. 
Wherein  he  has  one  chapter  against  infant-baptism : 
and  in  that  [at  p.  375]  a  quotation  of  a  letter  of 
Salmasius,  written  to  Justus  Pacius  under  the  name 
of  Simplicius  Verinus.  Where  Salmasius  says  ;  '  In 
'  the  first  two  centuries  none  received  baptism,  but 
'  such  as  being  instructed  in  the  faith,  and  made 
'  acquainted  with  the  doctrine  of  Christ,  could  de- 
'  clare  their  belief  of  it;    because  of  those  words, 

The  note,  or  scholion,  referred  to  in  the  text,  may  be  found 
at  p.  129.  of  the  edition  of  1570.  N".  14.] 

c  [See  Antonii  Van  Dale  dissertatio  super  Aristea  de  Ixx. 
Interpretibus:  additur  Historia  Baptismorum.  4to.  Amstel.  1705.] 


so  Salmasius. 

CHAP.  II. '  He  that  beUeveth  and  is  baptized :  so  that  believ- 
Year  after  '  iHg  is  to  be  tliG  first.  TheiicG  was  tliG  Order  of 
sties!^""  '  catechumens  in  the  church.  There  was  then  also 
'  a  constant  custom,  that  to  those  catechumens,  pre- 
'  sently  after  their  baptism,  the  eucharist  shoukl  be 
'  given.  Afterward  there  came  in  an  opinion,  that 
'  none  could  be  saved  that  was  not  baptized.  And 
'  so  there  grew  a  custom  of  giving  baptism  to  in- 
'  fants.  And  because  the  adult  catechumens,  as 
'  soon  as  they  were  baptized,  had  the  eucharist 
'  given  them,  without  any  space  of  time  passing 
'  between ;  it  was,  after  that  infant-baj^tism  was 
'  brought  in,  ordered  that  this  should  be  done  also 
'  with  infants.' 

Having  not  any  copy  of  Salmasius'  letters,  I  can 
judge  nothing  of  the  authenticalness'^  of  this  quota- 
tion ;  nor  can  give  any  guess  (if  Salmasius  did  write 
such  a  letter)  what  age  he  might  be  of  when  he 
wrote  it,  or  whether  he  published  it  himself.  I 
know  that  many  learned  men  have  suffered  much 
in  their  memory  by  having  all  their  letters  and 
posthumous  pieces  printed  after  their  death  :  some 

^  [The  letter  alluded  to  in  the  text  was  published  under  the 
following  title,  '  De  transubstantiatione  liber,  Simplicio  Verino 
i  Auctore.  Ad  Justum  Paciura  contra  H.  Grotium.  Hagiopoli, 
'  1646.'  8vo.  Salmasius  was  then  fifty-eight  years  of  age, 
having  been  born  in  1588.  The  passage  quoted  occurs  at 
p.  494,  and  is  fairly  given  by  V'an  Dale. 

It  should  be  remarked,  that  there  are  two  distinct  works  by 
Salmasius,  both  published  under  the  same  feigned  name,  both 
in  the  same  year,  both  directed  against  Grotius,  and  both  ad- 
dressed '  ad  Justum  Pacium  :'  but  the  earlier  of  the  two  calls 
itself  epistola,  and  the  latter  liber :  (in  this  particular  Van  Dale 
has  mistaken,  and  might  lead  an  inquirer  astray  :)  and  that  it  is 
the  second  work  which  Dr.  Wall  here  recites.] 


Dr.  Field,  and  Hugo  Grotius.  31 

whereof  were  such,  as  being  Mritten  in  their  youth, chap.  ir. 
they  themselves  would  have  been  ashamed  of  after-  {~^^^ 
ward,  and  would,  upon  better  information  and  read- ti^e  apo- 
ing,  have  recanted  :  an  instance  whereof  I  gave  just 
now,  in  one  that  in  his  youth  wrote  a  letter  so  like 
this,  that  one  may  seem  to  be  drawn  from  the  other. 
And  I  have  also  known  several  persons  who  have 
owned,  that  before  their  reading  the  ancient  books, 
they  have  been  inclined  to  such  an  opinion  against 
the  antiquity  of  infant-baptism,  as  is  expressed  in 
these  two  letters;  but  afterward  found  their  own 
mistake.  And  this  is  the  more  probable  in  the 
case  of  Salmasius,  for  that  he  never  did  in  his  con- 
versation or  books  (that  I  ever  heard  of)  shew  any 
inclination  to  antipa^dobaptism.  But  if  this  were 
his  steady  opinion  concerning  the  beginning  of 
paxlobaptism  ;  then  we  must  add  him  to  those  three 
or  four  men  that  have  said  this  ^^ithout  giving  any 
proof  from  antiquity  of  their  saying. 

I  find  this  very  passage  quoted  by  IMr.  Stennet 
[Answer  to  Russen,  p.  86]  as  from  Suicerus'  The- 
saurus^ sub  voce  Swafi?*".  Who  it  seems  took  it 
from  Salmasius. 

IX.  There  is,  as  I  said,  another  sort  of  learned 
men,  who,  though  they  think  with  the  rest  of  the 
world,  that  infant-baptism  was  ever  practised  in  the 
church  of  Christ,  yet  think  that  it  was  not  general 
or  universal  ;  but  that  in  the  elder  times  some 
Christian  parents  baptized  their  children  in  in- 
fancy, and  others  not :  and  that  it  was  counted 
indifferent. 

I  take  Grotius  to  be  the  author  of  this  opinion. 
For  though  some  before  him  did  observe  that  many 

e    [See  col.  1 136,  torn.  ii.  edit.  1728.] 


32  Dr.  Field.,  and  Hugo  Grotius. 

CHAP.  II.  persons  of  note  in  the  primitive  times  were  bap- 
Year  after  tized  at  man  s  age,  some  of  whom  they  took  to  be 
sties^^°"  ^'^^^  ^^  Christian  parents,  (which  last,  whether  they 
did  not  take  to  be  so  without  due  examination,  shall 
be  discoursed  afterward,)  yet  they  supposed  them 
to  be  not  enough  to  make  any  considerable  exception 
to  the  general  rule  and  practice  of  the  church. 

So  though  Dr.  Field,  in  his  treatise  Of  the 
Church^,  do  say,  that  '  besides  those  who  were  con- 

*  verted  from  paganism,  many  that  were  born  of 
'  Christian  parents,  put  off  their  baptism  a  long 
'  time :'  an  instance  of  which  he  makes  St.  Ambrose : 
yet  these  (whom  he  calls  many)  he  takes  to  be  so 
few  in  comparison,  that  he  still  speaks  of  the  other 
as  a  '  continued  practice'  or  tradition.  As  where 
he  treats  purposely  of  tradition^,  he  says : 

*  The  fourth  kind  of  tradition  is  the  contitmed 
^practice  of  such  things,  as  neither  are  contained 
'  in  the  scripture  expressly,  nor  the  example  of 
'  such  practice  expressly  there  delivered ;  though 
'  the  grounds,  reasons,  and  causes  of  the  necessity 
'  of  such  practice  be  there  contained;  and  the  benefit 

*  or  good  that  followeth  of  it.  Of  this  sort  is  the 
'  baptism  of  infants,'  &c. 

But  Grotius  from  this  and  some  other  arguments 
frames  an  hypothesis  of  the  indifferency  {libertas 
he  calls  it)  of  the  ancient  church  in  this  matter''. 
And  though  Rivet  do  suppose  that  Grotius  was  a 
convert  of  cardinal  Perron  in  this  point;  for  the 
said  cardinal  in  his  Reply  to  King  James  had  (as 
Rivet  *  observes)  '  pleaded  the  cause  of  the  anabap- 

<"  Page  719.     e  Lib.  iv.  cap.  20.     t  Annot.  in  Matt.  xix.  14. 
»  Apology.     [8vo.  Lugd.  Bat.  1643.  and   in  vol.  iii.  of  Riveti 
Opera  Theologica,  p.  1076.] 


Hugo  Grofius.  3S 

'  tists  with  all    his   might :   and  I   see,'  says  Rivet,  chap.  ii. 
'  that  he  has  brought  over  Hugo  Grotius :' — Yet  I  year  after 
count  it   proper   to   reckon   Grotius  as   the  author,  ^^jg^'^P"' 
because  what  the  Cardinal  had  said  was  very  pro- 
bably not  from  his  real  opinion,  but  from  a  design 
to  embroil   the  protestants,   by   giving   strength   to 
the  schism  of  the  antip^edobaptists,  who  then  began 
to  grow  rife  in  Holland  and  other  places.     A  design 
which   the  papists  have   since  earnestly  promoted  ; 
industriously  putting  it    into  their  books,   that  in- 
fant-baptism  cannot  be  jjroved  from   scripture,  but 
only  from  the  practice  of  the  church  :  and  as  some 
of  them  will  have  it,  not  from  any  evidence  of  the 
practice   of  the   ancient   church    neither,    but    only 
from  the  authority  of  the  present  church. 

I  am  not  willing  to  think  that  Grotius  had  so  ill 
a  design.  But  he  being  naturally  inclined  to  trim 
all  controversies  in  religion  that  came  in  his  way, 
and  using  that  vast  stock  of  learning  which  he  had 
(as  princes  that  would  hold  the  balance  do  their 
power)  to  help  the  weakest  side,  he  maintains  (not 
that  there  was  ever  any  church  or  any  time  in 
which  infant-baptism  was  not  used,  but)  that  in  the 
Greek  churches,  many  'persons,  from  the  beginning 
'  to  this  day,  do  observe  the  custom  of  delaying  the 
'  baptism  of  their  infants  till  they  are  able  to  make 
*  confession  of  their  own  faith  V 

The  mistake  that  he  is  here  guilty  of  in  reference 
to  the  modern  practice  of  the  Greek  churches,  in 
which  (as  all  men  are  now  sure)  there  neither  is, 
nor  lately  has  been,  any  such  thing  known  as  the 
delay  of  infants'  baptism,  (especially  if  he  mean 
the    Greek   churches   properly  so   called ;  for   what 

i  Annot.  in  Matt.  xix.  14. 
M^ALL,  VOL.  11.  D 


34  Hugo  Grotius. 

HAP.  II.  dispute  is  raised  concerning  the  Georgian  Christians  I 


Year  after  do  montion  hereafter  ^f)  makes  one  take  less  notice 
sties^^"  of  what  he  affirms  concerning  the  ancient  practice 
thereof.  As  he  jDroduces  no  proof  at  all  of  what  he 
says  of  the  late  times,  so  what  he  urges  for  this 
indifferency  of  the  elder  times  consists  in  these 
particulars. 
2 '4-  He  cites  the  canon  of  the  council  of  Neocaesarea, 
mentioned  above  ^  and  expounds  it  to  make  against 
infant-baptism. 

But  this,  if  it  proves  any  thing,  proves  too  much  : 
not  a  liberty,  but  an  unlawfulness  of  infant-baptism 
3oo-in  the  opinion  of  those  seventeen  bishops.     He  him- 
self says,  that  '  it  is  plain  that  in  St.  Austin's  time 

*  paedobaptism  was  received  in  all  churches  ;  because 

*  the   Pelagians  being  pressed  with  that  as  an  argu- 

*  ment  never  could  deny  it.'  And  was  it  not  obvious 
likewise  for  him  to  observe,  that  the  Pelagians 
being  pressed  with  this  argument,  'That  no  Chris- 
'  tian  ever  was  against  paedobaptism,'  could  not 
deny  it,  but  expressly  granted  it '"  ?  And  could  Pela- 
gius  and  St.  Austin  too  have  forgot,  that  a  council 

2 '4- of  seventeen  bishops  had  determined  against  it  but 
eighty  years  before,  if  they  or  any  body  else  had  at 
that  time  gathered  any  such  meaning  out  of  their 
words?  The  psedobaptists  say,  that  this  meaning 
lay  hid  for  1300  years  after  the  men  were  dead,  till 
he  picked  it  out.  But  of  this,  and  of  the  use  that 
he  makes  of  the  words  of  Balsamon  and  Zonaras 
thereupon,  was  discoursed  before  ". 

He  observes  also,  that  '  in  the  councils  one  shall 
'  find  no  earlier  mention   of  paedobaptism  than  in 

^  k  Ch.  8.  §.2.  1  Parti,  ch.  8.  §.  i, 

m  See  part  i.  ch.  19.  §.  30.  »  Parti,  ch.  8.  §.  6,  7. 


Hugo  Grotius.  SB 

'  the  council  of  Carthage.'     From  whence  he  would  chap.  ii. 
infer,  that  '  it  did  not  universally  obtain,   but   was  Year  after 

*  more  frequent  in  Africa  than  any  where  else.'  sties?^*' 

And  St.  Austin,  as  was  above  cited",  proves  that-^^^' 
it  must  have  been  instituted  by  the  apostles ;  be- 
cause it  did  and  ever  had  universally  obtained,  and 
yet  was  not  instituted  by  any  council.  Mentioned 
it  was  by  a  council  under  St.  Cyprian  p,  which  did 
not  enact  it,  but  take  it  for  granted . 

I  mentioned  before  ^  his  other  argument,  which  is  '5°' 
nothing  else  but  the  perverting  of  the  sense  of  a 
few  words  of  Gregory  Nazianzen,  (where  he,  speak- 
ing of  several  sorts  of  persons  that  die  without 
baptism,  names  among  the  rest  '  those  that  are  not 
'  baptized  Sia  vrjTrioTrjra,  by  reason  of  infancy,')  as  if 
Nazianzen  had  thereby  intimated  his  opinion  to 
be,  that  infancy  did  incapacitate  one  for  baptism. 
Whereas  if  the  reader  please  to  turn  back  to  part  1. 
ch.  11.  ^.  6.  where  I  have  cited  the  place  at  large, 
he  will   see  that   Nazianzen  there  reckons  *  those 

*  who  are  not  baptized  [or  have  missed  of  baptism] 

*  by  reason  of  their  infancy,'  among  those  whose  own 
fault  it  is  not,  that  they  are  not  baptized ;  and 
therefore  their  punishment  shall  be  less  in  the  world 
to  come. 

The  most  material  thing  that  he  brings,  is  the 
instance  of  Gregory  Nazianzen  and  St.  Chrysostom, 
born,  as  he  takes  it,  of  Christian  parents,  and  yet 
not  baptized  till  of  age.  Which  shall  be  discussed 
in  the  next  chapter. 

He  concludes,  '  that  all  that  he  has  brought  is 
'  of  no  force  to  prove  that  infant-baptism  should  be 

oPart  i.  ch.  15.  sect.  4.  §.  3.  p  Cypriani  Epist.  ad  Fidum. 

q  Part  i.  ch.  1 1.  §.  9. 

D  2 


36  Bishop  Taylor. 

CHAP.  II.  *  denied ;  but  only  to  shew  Uhertatem^  vetustatem^ 
Year  after  *  Gt  cousuetudinis  diffhrentiam,  the  liberty,  antiquity, 
sties?^''"     '  ^^^  difference  of  the  custom.' 

X.  I  said  before,  that  bishop  Taylor  is  to  be  reck- 
oned in  this  rank  ;  if  one  knows  where  to  reckon 
him,  or  can  reconcile  what  I  have  quoted  from  him, 
with  that  which  I  am  going  to  quote. 

He,  in  his  '  Dissuasive  from  Popery,'  one  of  his 
latest  w^orks,  being  busy  in  defending  the  protes- 
tant  doctrine  against  the  papists,  who  plead  the 
necessity  of  tradition  to  prove  infant-baptism  ;  and 
having  answered,  that  it  is  proved  enough  from 
scripture  as  to  the  lawfulness  of  it,  goes  on  to  shew 
that  tradition  does  not  do  so  much  service  in  the 
matter ;  for  that  it  delivers  it  to  us  as  the  custom  of 
'  some  Christians  in  all  times,  but  not  of  all.'  His 
words  are  these: 

'  At  the  first  they  did,  or  they  did  not,  according 
'  as  they  pleased  ;  for  there  is  no  pretence  of  tradi- 
'  tion,  that  the  church  in  all  ages  did  baptize  all  the 
'  infants  of  Christian  parents.  It  is  more  certain 
'  that  they  did  not  do  it  always,  than  that  they  did 
'  it  in  the  first  age.  St.  Ambrose,  St.  Hierome,  and 
'  St.  Austin,   were    born    of  Christian   parents,   and 

*  yet  not  baptized  until  the  full  age  of  a  man,  and 
'  more  ^.' 

And  a  little  after,  '  That  it  was  the  custom  so  to 
'  do  in  some  churches,  and  at  some  times,  is  without 

*  all  question ;  but  that  there  is  a  tradition  from  the 
'  apostles  so  to  do,  relies  but  upon   two   witnesses, 

no. «  Origen  and  St.  Austin  :    and  the  latter  having  re- 
'  ceived   it  from  the  former,  it  relies  wholly  upon 

■■  Part  ii.  lib.  i.  sect.  3.  p.  117.  [edit.  4to.  Lond.  1667  :  which 
was  the  earhest  impression  of  the  second  part  of  this  work.] 


Mr.  Thorndyke.  37 

'his  single  testimony;  which  is  but  a  pitiful  argu-cHAP.  ir. 
'  ment  to  prove  a  tradition  apostolical.     He  is  the  Year  after 

*  first  that  spoke  it:  but  Tertullian,  that  Avas  before ^[j^^^'P''' 
'  him,  seems  to  speak  against  it ;  which  he  would  loo. 

'  not  have   done,    if  it  had   been  a    tradition    apo- 
'  stolical.     And  that  it  was  not  so,  is  but  too  cer- 
'  tain,  if  there  be  any  truth  in  the  words  of  Ludo-  1422. 
'  mens    Vives^.^      And   then    he   recites   what   was 
above  cited  out  of  Lud.  Vives^. 

The  most  of  this  is  what  he  said  before",  and  on 
which  I  did  before  make  what  remarks  are  neces- 
sary :  as  I  shall  do  in  the  next  chapter,  on  what 
he  says  of  Ambrose,  Hierome,  Austin,  born  of 
Christian  parents,  and  yet  not  baptized  in  infancy. 
From  the  whole,  one  may  here  see  some  of  the 
workings  of  that  singular  fancy  that  this  bishop 
had  about  original  sin.  I  forgot  when  I  saw  his 
'  Dissuasive  from  Poj^ery,'  to  look  at  the  date  of  the 
edition  of  it,  and  to  see  if  it  were  not  a  posthumous 
one":  which  I  suspect,  because  what  he  says  in  it 
of  this  indifferency,  is  contrary  to  what  I  quoted 
before    (^.  6.)    out    of    his    '  Great    Exemplar'    and 

*  Ductor  Duhitantium  ;'  and  is  more  agreeable  to 
what  he  had  said  in  his  youth,  but  afterward  re- 
canted. 

XI.  Mr.  Thorndyke  also,  in  the  third  book  of 
his   '  Epilogue >,'    (which    is   of  the    '  Laws    of  the 

s  Page  118,  tSee§.3.  "See  §.6. 

"  [Bishop  Taylor  died  in  1667.  The  edition  referred  to  was 
pubhshed  in  that  year,  but  after  the  bishop's  death.] 

y  [An  Epilogue  to  the  Tragedy  of  the  Church  of  England; 
being  ^  necessary  consideration  and  brief  resolution  of  the  chief 
controversies  in  Religion  that  divide  the  Western  Church :  oc- 
casioned by  the  present  calamity  of  the  Church  of  England. 
In  three  books  :  by  Herbert  Thorndyke,  foho.  London,  1659.] 


88  Mr.DailU. 

CHAP.  II. '  Church,')  yields,  that  the  eastern  church,  (though 

Year  after  thoj  held  infaiit-baptism  necessary  in  case  of  the 

sties!^*''     danger  of  death,)  yet  did  sometimes  defer  it  when 

there  was  no  such  danger.     But  that  the  western 

church  enjoined  it,  as  the  present  church  does,  to  be 

given  presently. 

He,  as  well  as  Grotius,  Taylor,  &c.,  seems  to  be 
moved  to  this  concession  by  the  instances  of  Na- 
zianzen,  Nectarius,  &c.,  baptized  at  man's  age ;  of 
which  I  shall  speak  in  the  next  chapter,  and  shew 
the  most  of  them  to  be  mistakes. 

XII.  Monsieur  Daille  has  also  something  to  this 
purpose.     He  says^  '  In  ancient   times  they  often 

*  deferred  the  baptizing  both  of  infants  and  of 
'  other  people ;   as  appears   by  the  history  of  the 

*  emperors,  Constantino  the  Great,  of  Constantius, 
'  of  Theodosius,  of  Valentinian,  and  Gratian,  out  of 

*  St.  Ambrose  :  and  also  by  the  orations  and  homilies 
'  of  Gregory  Nazianzen%  and  also  of  St.  BasiP,  on 

*  this  subject.     And  some  of  the  Fathers  too  have 

*  been  of  opinion  that  it  is  fit  it  should  be  deferred, 
'  as  namely,  TertuUian,  as  we  have  formerly  noted 
'  out  of  him.' 

I  shall  have  occasion,  in  the  next  chapter,  to  dis- 
course concerning  those  instances  of  the  emperors. 
And  whereas  he  speaks  of  the  delay  of  the  baptism 
of  infants  and  other  people,  it  is  fit  for  the  reader 
to  observe,  that  the  orations  which  he  cites,  are 
indeed  a  proof  that  many  grown  people  converted 
did  put  off  their  baptism  a  long  time  ;  because  those 

z  De  Usu  Patrum,  lib.  ii.  c.  6.  [p.  329,  edit.  Genev.  i6j6.] 
a  Orat.  40. 

^  Ets  ^anriaixov  npoTpeiTTiKji.  [Op.  torn.  ii.  p.  1 1 3.  edit.  Bene- 
dict.] 


Mr.  Baxter.  39 

orations  or  sermons  are  made  on  purpose  to  con-  chap.  ii. 
vince  people  of  their  sin  and  dangei-  in  so  doing.  Year  after 
But  there  is  nothing  in  them  that  gives   any  evi- ^^j^J^p"" 
dence,  that  those  who  were  once  baptized  themselves, 
did  ever  delay  the  baptizing  of  their  children :  save 
that  in  one  of  them  Gregory  Nazianzen  gives  his 
opinion,  that  in  case  the  children  are  in  good  health, 
and  there   be   no  fear  of  their  death,  one  may  do 
well  to  defer  their  baptism  till  they  be  about  three 
years  old ;    but  otherwise,  to  baptize  them  out  of 
hand.     The  place  I  have  set  down  at  large,  part  1. 
ch.  ll.f.7. 

XIII.  Mr.  Baxter  also,  who  has  shewn  a  great 
deal  of  zeal,  and  spent  a  great  deal  of  pains  in 
maintaining  the  cause  of  psedobaptism,  yet  when 
he  is  in  a  complying  humour,  allows  thus  much : 
'  That  in  the  days  of  Tertullian,  Nazianzen,  and 
'  Augustine,  men  had  liberty  to  be  baptized,  or  to 
'  bring  their  children,  when,  and  at  what  age  they 
'  pleased  ;  and  none  were  forced  to  go  against  their 
'  consciences.'  And  that  *lie  knows  not  that  our 
'  rule  or  religion  is  changed :  or  that  we  are  grown 
'  any  wiser  or  better  than  they*^.' 

The  days  of  Tertullian  and  Nazianzen  are  pitched 
on,  I  suppose,  because  of  their  sayings,  which  have 
been  mentioned.  The  days  of  Austin  have  no  rea- 
son to  be  brought  in  here ;  but  only  because  Mr. 
Baxter  thought  that  his  parents  were  Christians,  (a 
mistake  common  to  him  with  many  others,)  and 
that,  they  not  baptizing  him  in  infancy,  it  was 
probable  that  many  other  Christians  omitted  it  like- 
wise. 

The  same  thing,  as  I  hear,  is  maintained  by  those 

c  Defence  of  the  Principles  of  Love,  p.  7.  8vo.  167  i. 


40  F.  Gamier. 

CHAP.  II.  Remonstrants    that    are    authors    of   Censura    Cen-r 


Year  after  suvcE^,  in  their  23rd  chapter. 

stTes!''''  XIV-  Since  the  writing  of  the  rest,  I  find  that 

Garnier  the  Jesuit  is,  or  would  seem  to  be,  of  this 
opinion;  by  what  he  says  in  his  notes  upon  a  ser- 
mon of  Nestorius,  published  with  Mercator's  works : 
'  In  those  old  times  baptism  was  not  given  pre- 
^  sently  after  the  birth,  as  it  is  now :  but  was  many 
'  times  deferred  a  great  while ;  not  only  by  the 
'  adults,  (who  came  to  it  at  their  own  time,)  but 
'  also  by  the  parents  of  infants,  till  they  were 
?  grown  up  ^.' 

This  race  of  men  at  first  pretended  to  no  more 
than  this ;  that  infant-baptism  cannot  be  proved 
from  scripture,  without  having  recourse  to  the 
proof  that  is  taken  from  the  practice  of  the  ancient 
church.  And  this  they  did,  that  they  might  force 
the  protestants  to  own  the  traditions  of  the  ancient 
church  to  be  necessary  in  determining  points  of 
religion ;  for  that  without  them  the  protestants 
could  not  defend  their  cause  against  the  antipaedo- 
baptists.  But  now  that  the  protestants  have  largely 
shewn  that  that  recourse  to  the  traditions  of  the 
ancient  church  does  turn  the  scale  on  the  protest- 
ants' side  against  the  papists  ;  and  that  they  find 
it  necessary  for  their  cause  to  decry  both  scripture 
and  the  traditions  of  the  ancient  church,  as  being 

d  [The  book  alluded  to,  but  incorrectly  named  by  Dr.  Wall, 
is  entitled,  '  Apologia  pro  Confessione  sive  Declaratione  Sen- 
'  tentise  eorum  qui  in  foederato  Belgio  vocantur  Remonstrantesj, 
'  contra  Censuram  quatuor  professorum  Leidensium.'  4to.  (sine 
loco)  1629.  The  passage  referred  to  occurs  at  p.  252,  254,  anc^ 
bears  out  the  statement  of  the  text.] 

P  Part  i.  p.  79.  edit.  1673. 


F.  Gamier.  41 

both   of  them   together   insufficient ;    and    that  we  ^ihap.  ii. 
must  throw  ourselves  on  the  authority  of  the  pre-  Year  after 
sent  church,  i.  e.  the  church  of  Rome :  they  do,  in  stiL!^*' 
order  to  force  this  down,  set  their  wits  to  maintain 
that  infant-baptism  cannot  be  proved,  neither  from 
scripture,  nor  from  the  primitive  practice,  but  only 
by  the  infallibility  of  the  present  church. 

But,  as  such  subtle  men  do  sometimes  forget 
themselves,  especially  if  they  be  voluminous  au- 
thors ;  this  same  Jesuit,  in  his  notes  on  another 
book,  says, '  When  the  apostle  writes  to  the  Romans, 
'  of  whom  several  had  been  baptized  in  infancy,  and 
'  yet  says.  So  many  of  lis  as  have  been  baptized  into 
'  Christ  Jesus^  have  been  baptized  into  his  death,  &c., 
*  under  those  general  words  he  comprehends  those 
'  that  were  baptized  before  the  use  of  reason  ^'  By 
making  some  that  were  grown  men  at  the  time  of 
this  epistle,  viz.  twenty-three  years  after  Christ's 
death,  to  have  been  baptized  at  Rome  in  their 
infancy,  he  supposes  infant-baptism  there  practised 
as  soon  as  the  gospel  can  be  reckoned  to  have  been 
preached  there,  and  perhaps  (if  we  compute  the 
times)  sooner. 

Mr.Danvers,  book  i.  ch.  7^,  produces  one  Boemus, 
who  should  say,  that  in  the  Christian  church,  and 

'  Notes  on  the  9th  chapter  of  Mercator's  Suhnotations,  p.  63. 
part  i.  edit.  1673. 

E  [Cent.  xii.  p.  73.  edit.  1674.  The  author  produced  is  Jo- 
annes Boemus  Aubanus,  calhng  himself  '  Sacerdos  Teutonics? 
'  mihtise  devotus,'  who  pubhshed  a  work  entitled,  '  Omnium 
'  gentium  Mores,  Leges^  et  Ritus,  ex  multis  clarissimis  rerum 
'  scriptoribus  coUecti.'  folio,  Augustse  Vindel.  15 20:  (reprinted 
in  1537,  again  in  1604.)  The  passage  given  (but  not  fairly)  by 
Dan  vers  occurs  at  chapter  t2  of  the  second  book,  fol.  37  in  the 
edition  of  1520.] 


42  Boemus.     Macaire. 

CHAP.  II.  Mr.  Stennet,  'Answer  to  Russen,'  p.  85,  one  Macaire, 
Year  after  who  shouM  saj,  that  in  the  church  of  Alexandria, 
sties'!^"'     no  infants  were  in  the  first  ages  baptized.     It  is 
the    unhappiness    of    vulgar   readers,    that    if    they 
see  a  strange  name  quoted,  they  think  it  a  great 
authority :  but  it   is   a  very  disingenuous   thing  to 
take  advantage  of  this  their  weakness.     It  is  like 
putting  off  bad  wares  u})on  ignorant  chapmen.     For 
Boemus,  I  could  never  hear  who  he  was,  nor  when 
he   lived.     (P.  S.    I   find,    since   the   first   edition, 
that  he  is  a  late  author  of  no  note  or  regard  for 
656.  learning.)    Macaire  (as  Mr.  Stennet  says)  was  bishop 
of  JMemphis  in   Egypt ''j  anno  756.     But  we  have 
no  account  from  him,  how  or  when  this  new-found 
book  of  his  came  to  light,  or  how  it  appears  to  be 
geimine.    This  is  certain,  that  at  that  time  there  was 
no  such  place  as  Memphis  ;  and  that  the  Saracens 
had  above  a  hundred  years  before  that  overrun  all 
Egypt,  whose  custom  was  to  destroy  all  Christian 
books  and  learning.     And  can  we  think  that  this 
unknown  man,  in  such  a  time  of  ignorance,  is  able 
to    tell    us    any    news    of    the    primitive    practice, 
which  Origen  (who  lived  in  Alexandria  five  or  six 
hundred  years  before  that)  and   the  other  Fathers 
who  had  a  clear  light  of  history  to  their  own  times, 
had  never  heard  of?     Such  authors  serve  only  to 
fill   up   a  crowd   of  names,   and    to    put   an    abuse 
upon    a    plain    honest    reader  :    the    prevention    of 
which  is  my  only  excuse  for  mentioning  these,  who 
are  by  no  means    to   be   reckoned  among  learned 
men. 

h  [And  secretary  to  Cosmus  III.  the  58th  patriarch  of  Alexan- 
dria :  Mr.  Stennet  quotes  from  Vansleb's  '  Histoire  de  I'Eghse 
'  d'Alexandrie,'  part  i.  c.  23.] 


Camden's  Britannia.  43 

There  is  also  a  passage  in  the  former  English  chap.  ii. 
editions  of  Camden's  '  Britannia,'  which,  if  every  Year  after 
reader  knew  who  is  the  author  of  it,  would  for  the  g^jp^^^'"' 
same  reason  have  no  need  of  being  mentioned  here. 
But  many  readers  take  all  that  is  there  put  into 
the  text,  for  Camden's  own :  whereas  Dr.  Holland 
the  translator  has  inserted  abundance  of  his  own 
additions.  And,  among  the  rest,  he  has  in  Cumber- 
land interpolated  among  Camden's  words,  a  fancy 
of  his  own  against  the  antiquity  of  infant-baptism. 
Camden  is  there  speaking  of  the  font  at  Bride  kirk 
in  that  county,  '  Which  is,'  he  says,  '  a  large  open 
'  vessel  of  greenish  stone,  with  several  little  images 
'  curiously  engraven  on  it ;'  having  also  an  inscri})- 
tion  which  he  could  not  read.  He  guesses  it  to 
have  been  made  originally  for  a  font,  (to  which  use 
it  is  still  employed,)  and  (to  account  for  the  images 
engraven  on  it)  he  says,  '  We  read  that  the  fonts 
'  were  anciently  adorned  with  the  pictures  of  holy 

*  men,  whose  lives  were  proposed  as  a  pattern  to 
'  such  as  were  baptized :'  for  which  he  quotes  in 
the  margin  Paulinus.  Then  follows  in  the  text  this 
addition  of  Dr. Holland's.  '  For  in  the  first  plantation 
'  of  Christianity  amongst  the  Gentiles,  such  only  as 

*  were  of  full  age,  after  they  were  instructed  in  the 

*  principles  of  the  Christian  religion,  were  admitted 
'  to  baptism.' 

Camden's  words,  quoted  from  Paulinus,  do  intimate 
no  more  than  this ;  that  there  were  in  ancient  times 
many  baptisms  of  adult  persons ;  but  that  such  only 
were  admitted,  is  said  only  by  Dr.  Holland,  who 
seems  to  have  concluded  it  too  hastily  from  what 
Camden  quoted. 

But  it   appears  since  by  a  more  accurate  view 


44  Mr.  Tomhes.  Mr.  Danvers. 

CHAP.  II.  taken  by  the  present  bishop  of  Carlisle^  of  the 
Year  after  inscription,  and  of  those  which  Camden  calls  images 
sties!^""  ^^^  ^^^®  ^^^^  font-stone,  that  the  contrary  to  what 
Dr.  Holland  thought  is  proved  from  them.  For  he, 
in  a  letter  to  sir  William  Diigdale,  (printed  in  the 
additions  to  the  last  edition  of  that  book,)  explains 
both  tlie  inscription  and  the  images  :  by  which 
latter  he  says,  '  We  have  there  fairly  represented 
'  a  person  in  a  long  sacerdotal  habit,  dipping  a  child 
'  into  the  water;  and  a  dove  (the  emblem,  no  doubt, 
'  of  the  Holy  Ghost)  hovering  over  the  infant,'  &;c. 

XV.  Of  the  professed  antipsedobaptists,  (for  all 
that  I  have  yet  mentioned  were  psedobaptists,  not- 
withstanding some  of  their  sayings  concerning  the 
ancient  use,)  Mr.  Tombes  was  a  man  of  the  best 
parts  in  our  nation,  and  perhaps  in  any ;  but  his 
talent  did  not  lie  much  in  ancient  history  or  reading. 
All  that  I  have  seen  of  his  of  this  nature  has  been 
considered,  in  speaking  of  the  authors  to  whom  he 
refers  '\ 

Mr.  Danvers  has  heaped  together  a  vast  rhapsody 
of  quotations  * ;  but  having  seldom  consulted  the 
authors  themselves,  but  taken  them  at  second  hand, 
and  out  of  any  sort  of  writers,  such  as  he  calls  by  the 
names  of  Twisk™,  Frank",  &c.,  and  a  book  called 

'  [Dr.  W.  Nicholson.  See  above,  at  vol.  i.  chap.  3.  §.  9.  p.  86. 
and  the  note  there.] 

k  Part  i.    ch.  4.    §.  8.    ch.  5.   §.  7.   ch.  6.  §.  i,  2,  &c.    ch.  21, 

1  Treatise  of  Baptism. 

^  [Mr.  Danvers  frequently  cites  as  authority  '  Twisk  Chronic. 
'  p.  &c.'  What  book  that  is,  I  have  not  yet  been  able  to  ascer- 
tain.] 

"  [Sebastian  Frank,  a  fanatical  author  of  the  sixteenth  century ; 
vfho,  among  sundry  strange   and  paradoxical  works,  published 


Mr.  Wills.  45 

jDntch  Martyrology,  &c.,  books  of  no  kind  of  credit,  chap.  h. 
he  has  for  the  most  part  strangely  misrepresented  year  after 
them.  t^f  'ipo- 

stles. 

He  was  pubHcly  accused  by  Mr.  Baxter",  and 
Mr.  Wills P,  for  a  wilful  forger  of  quotations  ;  and 
the  book  would  tempt  one  to  think  so.  But  upon 
second  thoughts,  I  hope  it  was  partly  his  authors, 
and  partly  want  of  good  heed  or  skill  that  misled 
him.  Mr.  Wills  went  so  far  as  to  put  in  an  appeal 
to  his  own  party  against  him,  that  they  ought  to 
renounce  him  :  and  he  printed  it.  But  he  and  they 
answered  as  well  as  they  could,  and  made  the  best 
of  a  bad  matter.  And  indeed  IMr.  Wills  in  that 
appeal  (for  want  of  books  I  suppose)  made  not  his 
best  advantage  of  the  charge  that  might  have  been 
brought  against  him  :  for  he  instanced  in  some  of 
his  false  quotations  that  were  of  the  least  conse- 
quence; omitting  those  of  greater,  and  such  as  it 
had  been  impossible  for  him  or  them  to  reconcile  : 
and  also  in  some  of  them  was  mistaken  himself. 

Most  of  the  rest  of  them  do,  as  much  as  may 
be,  avoid  speaking  of  the  practice  of  the  primitive 
church,  and  do  except  against  any  argument  brought 
from  thence  as  a  human  authority.  A  method, 
which,    if  they   be    resolved    to    continue    in    their 

a  '  Chronicle,  Annals,  and  History  of  the  Bible,'  first  printed 
ini53i,  and  reprinted  in  1536,  1538,  i543»  '585-] 

<J  Confutation  of  the  strange  Forgeries  of  H.  Danvers,  [being 
the  second  part  of  his  '  More  Proofs  of  Infants,'  &c.  80.  1675.] 

P  [See  '  Infant-baptism  asserted  and  vindicated  by  Scripture 
'  and  Antiquity  ;  in  answer  to  a  treatise  of  baptism  lately  pub- 
•  lished  by  Mr.  Henry  Danvers  :  together  with  a  full  detection  of 
'his  misrepresentations,  &c.  by  Obed.  Wills,  M.  A.'  S'.  1674. 
Also,  '  Vindiciae  Vindiciarum,'  &c.  and  '  An  Appeal  to  the 
'  Baptists,  against  Mr.  Danvers,  &c.  by  the  same.'  80.  1675.] 


46  Cases  of  Christians 

CHAP.  II.  opinion,  is  much  for  their  purpose  ;  provided   they 
Year  after  -"^^©t  with  adversaries  so  weak  as  to  let  it  so  pass 

the  apo-        over. 
sties. 

XVI.  I  have  produced  all  the  modern  learned 
men  that  I  know  of,  that  have  thought  that  infant- 
baptism  either  was  not  from  the  beginning,  or  was 
not  universal.  And  though  I  proposed  to  manage 
impartially,  yet  I  hope  no  reader  that  is  a  psedo- 
baptist  will  expect  that  I  should  do  the  like  with 
those  learned  men  that  give  their  verdict  for  it. 
Instead  of  that,  I  must  declare  that  all  the  rest  that 
I  have  seen,  that  have  occasion  to  speak  of  this 
matter,  are  of  o})inion,  that  the  sayings  of  the  Fa- 
thers are  a  sufficient  evidence  that  it  was  always  in 
use,  and  that  as  the  general  practice  of  the  church 
of  Christ. 

Indeed  they  will  many  of  them  say  thus:  that 
there  may  perhaps  be  produced  here  and  there  a 
singular  instance  of  a  person,  that  did  omit  it 
through  carelessness,  or  some  accident,  &c.,  and  that 
Tertullian  also  is  an  instance  of  one  man  that  ad- 
vised the  delay  of  it  till  the  age  of  reason,  in  case 
there  appeared  no  danger  of  death  in  the  meantime : 
and  that  this  is  ordinary  in  all  customs,  however 
allowed  and  established,  that  some  one  in  an  age 
happens  to  speak  or  act  against  them  :  and  that  a 
few  such  straggling  instances  are  not  to  be  esteemed 
of  force  sufficient  to  weaken  the  authority  of  a 
general  rule. 

But  it  seems  to  me  that  the  instances  which  the 
antipaedobaptists  give,  of  persons  not  baptized  in 
infancy,  though  born  of  Christians,  are  not  (if  the 
matter  of  fact  be  true)  so  inconsiderable  as  this  last 
plea  would  represent. 


not  baptized  in  Infancy.  47 

On  the  contrary,  the  persons  they  mention  are  so  chap.  ii. 
many,  and  such  noted  persons  ;  that,  (if  they  be  all  Year  after 
allowed,)  it  is  an  argument  that  leaving  children  un-^Y^^''" 
baptized  was  no  unusual,  but  a  frequent  and  ordi- 
nary thing.  For  it  is  obvious  to  conclude,  that  if 
we  can  in  so  remote  an  age  trace  the  practice  of  so 
many  that  did  this ;  it  is  probable  that  a  great 
many  more,  of  whose  birth  and  baptism  we  do  not 
read,  did  the  like.  This  I  will  own,  that  it  seems 
to  me  the  argument  of  greatest  weight  of  any  that 
is  brought  on  the  antipaedobaptists'  side  in  this 
dispute  about  antiquity.  And  I  believe  the  reader 
has  observed  in  the  places  I  have  last  quoted,  that  it 
is  that  which  has  most  prevailed,  both  with  Strabo 
and  Vives,  to  think  it  was  once  the  general  practice 
to  leave  infants  unbaptized ;  and  with  Grotius, 
bishop  Taylor,  and  the  others,  to  think  it  was  once 
counted  indifferent.  It  deserves  therefore  not  to  be 
so  slightly  passed  over;  but  if  one  had  time  and 
opportunity,  to  be  thoroughly  examined. 

The  worst  is,  it  is  a  business  of  a  great  deal  of 
dust  and  tediousness,  to  search  after  the  birth  and 
parentage  of  so  many  men,  (who,  though  they  were 
conspicuous  persons,  yet  many  of  them  sprang  from 
obscure  originals,)  and  not  to  be  well  done  by  any 
who  has  not  a  good  library  at  hand.  I  have  in  my 
reading  taken  some  observations  of  this  matter, 
which  I  shall  communicate  in  the  next  chai)ter. 


48  Some  Ancient  Christians 

CHAP.  III. 

Of  those  who  are  said  to  have  heen  horn  of  Christian  Parents^ 
and  yet  not  baptized  till  of  Man's  Age. 

Sect.  I.  An  account  of  the  Persons,  and  state  of 
their  Case. 

CHAP.TiT.  I.  THE  instances  of  this  that  are  commonly 
Year  after  given,  are  the  five  emperors  mentioned  before  by 
sties^^°"  ^^*  ^^ill^'  ^iz;.  Constantine,  Constantius,  Gratian, 
Valentinian  the  Second,  and  Theodosius  the  First, 
and  also  four  noted  persons  of  the  Greek  church,  viz. 
St.  Basil,  St.  Gregory  Nazianzen,  Nectarius,  and  St. 
Chrysostom ;  and  three  of  the  Latin,  St.  Ambrose, 
St.  Hierome,  and  St.  Austin.  Mr.  Tombes  mentions 
also  Alypius  and  Adeodatus;  one  the  friend,  and 
the  other  the  base  son,  of  St.  Austin  :  and  both 
baptized  at  the  same  time  with  him. 

Many  of  the  psedobaptists  make  but  weak  an- 
swers to  the  argument  that  is  drawn  from  the  ex- 
ample of  these  men.  They  content  themselves  to 
say,  that  it  was  from  some  erroneous  or  corrupt 
principles,  that  many  in  those  times  thought  fit  to 
defer  baptism  a  great  while ;  and  some  till  just 
before  death  :  either  that  they  might  gain  a  longer 
time  for  their  lusts,  or  because  they  thought  that 
wilful  sins  committed  after  baptism  could  not  be 
forgiven. 

That  many  new  converts  did  do  this,  is  too 
plain ;  and  is  a  thing  grievously  complained  of  by 
the  preachers  of  those  times  :  and  the  granting  of  it 
to  be  true  does  not  at  all  affect  the  question  in 
hand ;  which  is  not,  whether  adult  persons  did  defer 
their  own  baptism  :  but  whether  such  adult  persons 
as  were  come  to  a  full  resolution  of  being  Christians, 


iMt  baptized  {?i  Infancy.  49 

and  were  accordingly  baptized   themselves,  did  usecHAP.iii. 
to  baptize  their  children  in  infancy  or  not.     And  to 

,  .       ,  Year  after 

grant  this  latter,  that  they  who  were  once  baptized,  the  apo- 
did  frequently  use  to  let  their  children  grow  up'*^'" 
without  baptism,  is  to  weaken,  in  great  measure, 
the  argument  for  infont-baptism  that  is  drawn  from 
the  practice  of  these  ancients.  For  if  many  did  omit 
it,  though  upon  erroneous  grounds,  the  argument 
from  the  general  practice  is  lost. 

But  some  others  have  attempted  a  better  answer, 
by  shewing  these  instances,  or  some  of  them,  to  be 
mistakes  :  and  that  not  all  the  persons  mentioned 
were  born  of  Christian  parents;  ])articularly  Con- 
stantine  and  Austin  have  been  excepted ;  as  it  was 
indeed  easy  to  shew  that  those  two  ought  to  be. 
I  shall  make  some  particular  search  concerning  each 
of  them. 

And  the  thing  to  be  inquired  concerning  each  of 
them,  is; 

1st,  Whether  his  baptism  were  delayed  till  years 
of  age.     And  if  so,  then, 

2dly,  Whether  his  ])arents  were  baptized  Chris- 
tians at  the  time  of  his  birth.  I  say,  ba])tized  :  be- 
cause it  was,  as  I  said  before,  a  very  common  thinjr 
for  men  in  those  times  to  be  Christians  in  their 
intention,  and  in  their  conscience,  i.  e.  they  were 
convinced  that  that  was  the  truth,  and  did  resolve 
some  time  or  other  to  be  baptized  into  it ;  and  yet 
did  put  this  off  from  time  to  time,  (as  lukewarm 
men  do  nowadays  their  repentance,  or  their  receiv- 
ing the  other  sacrament,)  knowing  that  baptism 
would  engage  them  to  a  very  strict  course  of  life. 
And  in  this  state  many  lived  for  a  long  time  after 
their  conversion:    being   in   some   sense  Christians, 

WALL,   VOL.   11.  E 


50  Some  ancient  Christians. 

CHAP.iii.j.  e.  they  declared  for  that   religion   as  the  truth, 
Year  after|  they  favoured    it,  they  spoke  for  it,  and  in  many 
sties^^^      things  lived  according  to  the  rules  of  it ;  but  for  all 
that,  were  not  as  yet  baptized,  and  so  not  account- 
ed, in  the  phrase  of  those   times,  Jideles,   faithful, 
or  brethren. 

These  men,  while  they  were  in  this  state,  had 
oftentimes  children  born  to  them :  and  for  such,  it 
cannot  be  expected  that  they  should  bring  their 
children  to  baptism,  before  they  could  find  in  their 
heart  to  be  baptized  themselves. 

Also  many  such  children,  (being  not  baptized  in 
their  infancy,  because  their  parents,  though  believers, 
were  not  yet  baptized,)  when  they  grew  up,  delayed 
their  baptism,  as  their  fathers  had  done ;  and  so  the 
mischief  was  continued.  To  these  it  often  happened 
that  they  were  instructed  from  their  youth  in  the 
Christian  religion,  and  yet  not  baptized.  Of  such 
St.  Basil  speaks  in  the  place  cited,  part  i.  ch.  12. 
}.  3,  4. 

Therefore  you  see  I  had  reason  to  say  that  our 
inquiry  is  of  infants  born  of  parents  that  were  at 
that  time  baptized  Christians.  And  that  is  all  that 
any  psedobaptist  would  have  to  be  done  now,  viz. 
that  when  any  man  is  baptized  himself,  he  should 
baptize  his  infant  children. 

Mr.  Walker,  endeavouring  to  shew  that  the  in- 
stances brought  by  the  antipaedobaptists  do  them  no 
service,  because  the  ancients  that  delayed  their  chil- 
dren's baptism,  did  it  not  on  the  same  principles 
that  they  do  now,  viz.  of  the  unlawfulness  of  it ; 
reckons  up  several  reasons  which  moved  some  for- 
merly to  delay  the  baptism  of  their  children  :  where- 
of the  first  is  doubtless  a  plain   and  true   one,  viz. 


not  baptized  in  Infancy.  51 

'  That  some  were  as  yet  heathens  themselves,  when  chap.iii. 
*  their  children  were   born  ;  and  no  marvel  if  they  Year  after 
'  would    not    make    their    children    Christians,'  &c.  ^j.'jg^P''" 
'  And  the  same  is  the  case  of  such  as,  though  in 
'  heart  and  purpose  Christians  when   their  children 
'  were  born,  yet  kept  off  from  being  baptized  "^i.'   But 
he  gives  three   reasons   more,  for  wdiich  some  that 
were  baptized  themselves  might  delay  the  baptizing 
of  their  children. 

Any  reader  would,  from  what  he  says,  conclude 
or  suspect  that  many  did  this ;  at  least  that  for 
these  three  reasons  there  were  an  account  of  three 
persons  that  had  done  it.  But  upon  search,  I  be- 
lieve, it  will  appear  that  there  is  no  proof  of  so 
many  as  three ;  and  that  there  is  but  one,  viz.  the 
father  of  Gregory  Nazianzen,  that  makes  an  instance 
for  this:  and  he  not  a  plain  one;  for  it  depends 
on  an  obscure  point  in  chronology,  whether  the 
son  were  born  before  his  father's  Christianity,  or 
after  ? 

In  making  this  inquiry,  I  shall  begin  witli  empe- 
rors. Of  whom  it  is  ]5roper  to  note,  that  whereas 
Mr.  Daille  having,  as  I  cited  before,  spoke  of  the 
frequent  deferring  the  baptism  of  children  and  of 
other  people,  names  the  emperors ;  I  suppose  he 
means  them  among  the  other  people,  not  among  the 
children  whose  baptism  was  deferred.  For  all  take 
him  to  be  a  man  of  another  pitch  of  reading,  than 
that  he  should  think  Constantine's  ftither,  for  exam- 
ple, to  have  been  a  'Christian.  But  the  antip^edo- 
baptists  take  this  from  him  ;  and  they  understand 
it  so,  and  do  very  tenaciously  maintain  that  it 
was  so. 

1  Preface  to  Modest  Plea  for  Infants'  I'aptisai. 
E  2 


52  Gonstantine  the  Great. 

CHAP.iii.      §.2.   Of  Constantine   and   Constantius    his    sou  ; 

Year  after  that  they  were  not  born  of  baptized  parents. 

stie^^**  I.  That  Constantine  was  not  baptized  in  infancy, 

but,  on  the  contrary,  in  his  old  age,  is  a  plain  case. 
Eusebius,  who  was  familiar  with  him,  tells  us^ 
when  and  how  it  was,  viz.  that  when  he  thought 
himself  near  death,  he  went  to  Nicomedia,  and 
having  assembled  the  bishops  in  the  suburbs  of  that 
city,  '  he  spoke  thus  to  them  ;' 
237-  'This  is  the  time  which  I  have  long  expected, 
'  with  earnest  desire  and  prayers,  to  obtain  the  sal- 
'  vation  of  God.  It  is  time  that  I  also  should  enjoy 
'  the  badge  of  immortality  ;  time  that  I  should  be 
'  made  partaker  of  the  seal  of  salvation.  I  purposed 
'  once  to  receive  it  in  the  waters  of  the  river  Jordan, 
'  in  which  our  Saviour  is  recorded  to  have  been 
'  baptized  for  our  example.  But  God,  who  knows 
'  what  is  fittest  for  me,  is  pleased  to  grant  it  me 
'  now  in  this  place.  Therefore  let  me  not  be  de- 
'  layed  :  for  if  he  that  is  Lord  both  of  life  and 
'  death,  be  pleased  to  continue  my  life  in  this  world, 

•  and  if  he  have  determined  that  I  shall  any  longer 
'  hold  assemblies  with  the  people  of  God,  and  shall 
'  once  in  the   church   communicate  in   the  prayers 

*  tooether  with  the  cono-reo-ation  ;  I  will  hencefor- 
'  ward  keep  myself  to  such  courses  of  life  as  become 
'  a  servant  of  God.' 

'  This  he  spake.  And  they  performing  the  cere- 
'  monies,  put  in  execution  the  Divine  ordinance,  and 
'  made  him  partaker  of  the  *unspeakable  gift,  re- 
'  quiring  of  him  the  professions  that  are  usual.  And 
'  so  Constantine,  the  only  man  of  all  the  emperors 
'  that  ever  were,  being  regenerated  by  Christ's  ordi- 

■■  De  Vita  Constantini,  lib.  iv.  c.  62. 


Constaniius  Chlorus.  53 

*  nance,  was  initiated ;  and  being  made  partaker  of  chap.hi. 
'the    Divine    seal,   he  rejoiced    in    spirit,    and   was vear after 
'  renewed  and  filled  with  the  Divine  light,'  &c.  J'/f^^P"" 

It  is  not  material  to  mention  the  story  which 
Nicephorus^,  a  tlionsand  years  after,  sets  on  foot; 
that  he  was  baptized  at  Rome,  by  pope  Sylvester, 
near  the  beginning  of  his  reign  :  becanse  it  is  all 
one  to  onr  purpose.  Baronins*  greedily  embraces 
this  latter  account;  I  suppose,  because  it  makes  for 
the  credit  of  the  church  of  Rome,  and  helps  to  dress 
up  the  fable  of  the  donation.  But  Perron,  Petavius^ 
and  others  forsake  him  in  this,  as  being  too  impro- 
bable, since  it  was  so  lately  invented. 

II.  But  since  both  by  the  one  and  the  other  of 
these  accounts  he  was  not  baptized  in  infancy  ;  we 
must  inquire  of  the  religion  of  his  parents ;  and 
first  of  his  father  Constantius  Chlorus. 

To  think  that  Constantine,  whose  name  all  peo- 
ple, both  learned  and  unlearned,  remember  by  the 
token  that  he  was  the  first  Christian  emperor,  (at 
least  of  his  race,)  should  have  a  Christian  emperor 
to  his  father,  does  appear  so  great  and  so  palpable 
a  blunder ;  that  any  one  would  pass  a  severe  cen- 
sure on  it,  were  it  not  that  the  learned  Camden  has 
let  drop  an  expression  sounding  that  way.  Pie 
having  occasion,  in  his  account  of  the  city  of  York, 
to  speak  of  Constantius,  the  father  of  Constantine, 
calls  him  '  an  excellent  emperor,  endowed  with  all 

*  moral  and    Christian    virtues, after    his    death 

*  deified,  as  appears  by  the  old  coins".' 

s   Hist.  Eccl.  lib.  vii.  c.  33.  t  Ad  annum  324. 

"  [Camden's  Britannia,  by  Gibson,  p.  880,  edit.  1722. — Vol. 
ii.  p.  99.  edit.  1772. — Compare  Gough's  edition,  fol.  1789,  voL 
iii.  p.  ID.] 


54  Constantius  Chlorus. 

CHAP.iii.  The  latter  part  of  this  sentence  does  not  suffer 
Year  after  One  to  think  that  Camden  did  in  the  former  part 
sdes"^°'  ^f  ^^  mean  that  Constantius  was  really  a  Christian, 
(but  only  that  he  favoured  the  Christians,  and  had 
himself  virtues  something-  like  those  of  a  good 
Christian ;)  for  Christian  emperors  were  not  often 
deified  by  the  heathens.  And  accordingly,  when 
Fuller'^  had,  in  his  '  Church  History,'  at  the  year 
305,  reflected  on  this  saying  of  Camden,  as  *  going- 
'  too  far ;'  since  Constantius  was  no  otherwise  a 
Christian  than  by  that  rule,  '  He  that  is  not  against 

*  us,   is  on  our  side :'  Heyliny  in   his  '  Animadver- 

*  sions'  on  that  book,  though  he  rebuked  Fuller,  as 
being  too  tart  upon  so  great  a  man  as  Camden,  yet 
grants  the  thing,  viz.  that  Constantius  was  not  a 
thoroughpaced  Christian. 

What  Camden  spoke,  he  spoke  only  by  the  by. 
But  some  antipsedobaptists  do  go  about  seriously 
to  justify  this,  and  make  an  argument  of  it  for  their 
tenet.  And  if  only  Danvers  had  done  so,  I  should 
not  have  taken  any  notice  of  it :  for  he  is  used  to 
such  arguments.  But  Mr.  Stennet  also  has  not 
sheAvn  the  candour  to  throw  away  such  a  false  prop 
to  their  cause:  but  reckons  Constantino  among  those 
whose  '  not  submitting  to  this  ordinance  till  they 
'  were    adult,    though    born    of    Christian    parents, 

X  ['The  Church  History  of  Britain,'  fol.  Lond.  1655.  Book  i. 
p.  20.] 

y  [See  '  Exainen  Historicum,  or  a  discovery  and  examination 
'  of  the  mistakes,  falsities,  and  defects  in  some  modern  histo- 
'  ries.'  (by  P.  Heylin)  8vo.  London,  1659.  part  i.  p.  20. — See 
hkewise  Fuller's  reply  to  this  remark  of  Heylin,  in  his  '  Appeal 
'  of  injured  Innocence — in  a  controversy  between  Dr.  P.  Heylyn, 
'  and  J,  Fuller.'  fol.  1659.  part  i.  p-7i] 


Constantius  Chlorus.  55 

*  shews,  he  says,  that  infant-baptism  was  not  uni-cHAP.iii. 
'  versally  received.'     Answer  to  Russen,  p.  47.     Of'. 7~ 

'    i  '  1  ear  after 

the  rest  that  he  there  reckons  up,  I  must  speak  intheapo- 
the  following  sections;  but  Constantine  they  ought'  ^' 
of  their  own  accord  to  have  left  out ;  for  it  does  but 
hurt  their  cause  to  build  on  a  supposal,  which  almost 
every  one  knows  to  be  a  mistake  in  matter  of  fact. 

Yet  something  Mr.  Danvers  has  to  say  for  this 
too,  that  Constantius  was  a  Christian.  He  takes 
out  of  the  '  JNIagdeburgenses'  a  piece  of  a  sentence  of 
Eusebius,  where  speaking  of  Constantine,  he,  says 
he,  was  '  bonus  a  bono ;  pius  a  pio ;'  '  a  good  man, 
'  son  of  a  good  man  ;  a  pious  man,  son  of  a  pious 
'  man.'  It  is  not  worth  the  while  to  look  whether 
this  be  truly  quoted  or  not^  It  is  certain  that 
Eusebius,  out  of  his  desire  to  honour  Constantine, 
and  all  that  belonged  to  him,  did  stretch  his  expres- 
sions to  further  reaches  than  this:  as  where  he 
says,  Constantine  '  became  a  follower  of  his  father's 
'  piety  [or  pious  favour,  or  respect]  toward  our  reli- 
'  gion^'  And  at  another  place, '  He  considered  unto 
'  what  God  he  should  address,  &c.,  and  so  he  resolved 
'  to  reverence  his  father's  God  only^.' 

These  places  being  picked  out  by  themselves, 
would  make  one  think  that  Constantius  had  pro- 
fessed Christianity.  But  whoever  reads  the  whole 
account  will  (whether  he  be  prejudiced  for  one  or 
the  other  side  of  this  controversy)  agree,  that  all 
that  is  meant  by  these  compliments  amounts  but  to 

2  [The  words  occur  in  the  Centur.  Magdeburg.  Cent.  iv. 
cap. 3.  sect.  'De  tranquiUitate  Ecclesiae  sub  Constantino,'  tom.ii. 
p.  61.  edit.  Basil.  1560.] 

^  Hist.  Hb.  viii.  c.  13. 

b  De  Vita  Const,  hb.  i.  c.27. 


56  Constantius  Chlorus. 

CHAP.iii. this;  that  at  the  time  when  his  fellow  emperors  did 
Year  after  bitterly  persecute  the  Christians,  he  on  the  other 
thejipo-  g-^jg  favoured  them,  and  screened  them  as  much  as 
be  could,  and  on  all  occasions  shewed  a  good  opin- 
ion of  them  and  their  religion.  And  so  it  is  in 
the  places  themselves  explained;  not  that  he  ever 
made  it  his  own  religion.  He  died  a  heathen ;  and 
that  he  was  by  the  heathens  deified  after  his  death, 
appears  not  only  by  the  coins,  but  also  by  Eusebius' 
words. 

And  besides,  Eusebius  himself  determines  this 
matter  clearly  and  fully  (as  far  as  concerns  our 
purpose)  in  the  place  before  recited  c;  when  having 
related  Constantine's  baptism,  he  adds,  '  That  he 
'  was  the  first  of  all  the  emperors  that  ever  were, 
'  that  being  regenerated,'  &c.  And  again,  '  That 
'  he  only,  of  all  that  had  been,  did  profess  the  Gos- 
'  pel  of  Jesus  Christ  with  great  liberty  of  speech^,' 
i.  e.  did  make  open  profession  of  it. 

So  little  do  some  scraps  of  sentences  picked  here 
and  there  out  of  authors  for  one's  purpose  signify, 
to  give  an  account  of  their  true  meaning. 

Beside    that,   if   Constantius    had    embraced    the 

204.  Christian  religion  when  he  was  em})eror ;  yet  there 

is  no  appearance  that  he  had  any  inclination  to  it 

174- when    his    son    Constantine    was    born,   which    was 

thirty  years  before. 

As  for  Helena,  Constantine's  mother,  though  the 
inquiry  concerning  her  religion  be  not  very  mate- 
rial; because  not  many,  especially  great  men,  suffer 
their  wives  to  choose  what  religion  their  sons  shall 
be  entered  into ;  yet  I  made  some  inquiry.  And 
after  I  had,  in  order  to  discover  her  religion,  searched 

e  De  Vita  Const,  lib.  iv.  c.  62.  '   Ibid.  cap.  75. 


Constantius  CMorus,  and  Helena.  51 

into  the  accounts  of  her  condition  and  parentage,  chap.iii. 
which  are  so  variously  given,  (some  making  her  a  Year  after 
Bithynian,  others  a  Briton,  (but  these  last  mar*t]es^^°" 
their  own  story  by  relating  her  to  be  a  king's 
daughter;  whereas  all  about  that  time  speak  of  her 
as  one  of  a  mean  quality,  she  being  in  scorn  called 
Stabularia,)  some  taking  Ler  for  a  wife,  others  for  a 
concubine ^  others  for  an  absolute  harlot^  to  Con- 
stantius, and  those  that  call  her  a  wife,  must  con- 
sequently grant  that  he  had  two  at  a  time,  or  else 
that  Helena  was  divorced  when  he  married  Theo- 
dora) I  found  it  was  needless  to  inquire  any  further, 
when  I  saw  that  Eusebius,  a  witness  unquestion- 
able in  this  matter,  says^,  that  '  her  son  Constan- 
'  tine  first  brought  her  to  be  a  godly  woman  [or 
'  Christian],  which  she  was  not  before.'  In  her  old 
age  all  agree  that  she  proved  a  very  zealous  Chris- 
tian. And  it  does  something  excuse  her  former  way 
of  living,  that  it  was  before  her  Christianity. 

III.  And  as  for  Constantius  the  son  of  Constan- 
tine,  what  has  been  said  of  Constantino's  late  bap- 
tism does  without  more  ado  satisfy  us  of  the  reason 
why  his  son  Constantius  was  not  baptized  in  in- 
fancy. Constantine  probably  was  not  resolved  what  ^'7- 
religion  to  be  of,  but  certainly  M'as  not  baptized 
when  Constantius  was  born,  nor  a  long  time  after. 

And  concerning  Fausta,  the  mother  of  this  Con- 
stantius, the  daughter  of  Maximianus  Herculius, 
(the  bloodiest  enemy  the  Christians  ever  had,)  whom 
Constantine  was  forced  to  marry  for  reason  of  state; 
there  is  no  probability  that  she  was  a  Christian  when 

^  Orosius,  lib.  vii.  c.  25.  '  Nicephorus  Hist,  Eccles.  lib.  vii. 
c.  18. 

P  Lib.  iii.  de  Vita  Const,  c.  47. 


58  Constantine  the  Great. 

CHAP. III.  this  son  was  born,  and  very  little  that  she  was  ever 

Year  after  ®^  ^^  ^^^ '  ^^^  Constantine  put  her  to  death  not  long 

the  apo-      after.     On  the  contrary,  some  histories  speak  of  her 

endeavours  to  alienate  her  husband's  mind  from  that 

religion  ^ 

So  Constantius  not  having  been  baptized  into  the 
Christian  religion  in  infancy,  (as  it  was  impossible 
he  should,)  but  coming  afterward  to  the  knowledge 
of  it,  and  approving  it,  yet  he  did  as  his  father  had 
done  before,  i.  e.  he  deferred  his  baptism  to  the  end 
261. of  his  life;  for  it  was  but  just  before §■  his  death  that 
he  was  baptized  by  Euzoius,  the  Arian  bishop  of 
Antioch. 

About  five  or  six  years  before,  Lucifer,  bishop 
of  Calaris,  had  wrote  his  mind  very  plainly  and 
bluntly  to  him  in  defence  of  Athanasius,  whom 
he  grievously  persecuted ;  and  told  him,  that  instead 
of  abusing   Athanasius,    he    had*'    '  great    need    to 

*  desire  that  holy  priest  of  God  to  pray  to  God 
'  for  him  for  the  forgiveness  of  his  impieties,  as 
'  Job's  friends  desired  Job ;  and  to  procure  himself 
'  to  be  baptized  by  him,  or  some  of  his  fellow  bi- 
'  shops.'  And  St.  Hilary  had  complained'  that  he, 
credendi  formam  ecclesiis  nondum  regeneratus  im- 
poneret:  '  should  pretend  to  prescribe  a  form  of 
'  faith  to  the  churches,  when  he  was  not  yet  regene- 

*  rated  [i.  e.  baptized]  himself.' 

f  Mich.  Glycas,  Annul,  lib.  iv.  [p.  248.  edit.  Paris,  1661.] 

g  Athanas.  de  Synodis, — §-31.  Socrat.  Hist.  Eccl.  lib.  ii. 
cap.  ult. 

h  Lucifer  pro  Athanasio,  lib.  i.  [§.  46.  apud  Biblioth.  Patrum, 
torn.  ii.  edit.  Colon.  161 8.] 

'  Hilarius  de  Synodis,  prope  finem.  [§.  78.  p.  11 84.  edit. 
Benedict.] 


Constantine  the  Great.  59 

Indeed  both  he  and  his  father  Constantine  were  chap.iii. 
guilty  of  such  wickedness,  even  after  their  declaring  Year  after 
for  the  Christian  relioion,  (Constantine  in  murderino- tte  apo- 
so  many  of  his  kindred  ;  and  he  in  doing  the  like,  154- 
and  also  in  persecuting  the  catholic  Christians,)  that 
it  is  no  wonder  if  a  guilty  conscience   kept  them 
from  baptism,  till  they  could  find  in  their  heart  to 
repent  of  such  barbarities.     And  when  the  papists 
object   to   us   our   reformation  begun  under  such  a 
king  as  Henry  VIII.   they  may  reflect,   that  Con- 
stantine, by  whose  means  the  allowed  profession  of 
Christianity  itself  was  brought  into  the  world,  has 
not  a  much  better  character.     And  that  it  does  not 
please  God  always  to  choose  good  men,  but  some- 
times to  make  wicked  kings  instruments  of  bringing 
his  purposes  to  pass. 

But  yet  there  is,  I  think,  no  Christian  writer  that 
presses  so  hard  upon  the  credit  of  Constantine  in 
this  matter,  as  Baronius,  and  they  of  the  church  of 
Rome  that  follow  him.  They  strike  in  with  that 
scandalous  story  which  the  heathen  writers  of  that 
time  did  dress  up  on  a  purpose  of  spite  and  slander 
to  the  Christian  religion,  and  to  Constantine  for 
embracing  of  it :  which  was,  that  he,  after  the 
murder  of  his  son  Crispus,  and  his  wife  Fausta,  and 
his  sister's  son  Licinius,  &c.,  was  terrified  in  con- 
science, and  sought  among  the  heathen  priests  for 
somebody  that  would  exi)iate  him,  and  give  him 
hopes  of  pardon.  But  that  these  told  him,  that  they 
had  rites  of  expiation  for  very  great  sins,  and  for 
ordinary  murders ;  but  none  for  such  parricide  as 
his  was  :  and  so  left  him  in  despair.  And  that  then 
it  was  that  he  was  informed,  what  large  offers  of 
pardon   the  Christian  religion   made   to  all  comers 


60  VaUntinian  the  First. 

CHAP.iii.  that  would  be  baptized  ;  and  embraced  that,  not  out 
Year  after  of  auj  liking  to  its  doctrinos,  but  because  no  other 
sties!^°      would  receive  him. 

It  is  questionless  no  discredit  to  any  religion  (but 
the  excellency  of  it)  to  have  such  sacraments,  to 
which  is  annexed  the  promise  of  forgiveness  of  the 
greatest  sins ;  provided  it  does  lay  severe  injunc- 
tions against  practising  the  same  for  the  future. 
Yet  since  this  story  is  set  on  foot  by  Zosimus**  and 
other  heathens,  out  of  spite  to  Constantine  and  the 
Christian  religion  ;  and  is  false  ;  and  is  shewed  to 
be  so  by  Sozomen',  and  other  Christian  historians, 
(for  Constantine  favoured  Christianity,  and  made 
laws  in  favour  of  it,  before  this  time,)  it  discovers 
an  ill  bias  in  Baronius,  who  (to  make  the  fable  of 
his  baptism  at  Rome  more  probable)  embraces  it. 
But  the  men  of  that  court  make  no  scruple  to 
advance  the  repute  and  pride  of  it,  by  treading  not 
only  on  the  necks  of  present  emperors,  but  also  on 
the  credit  of  the  most  ancient  ones.  For,  according 
to  this  character,  what  difference  is  there  between 
Constantine  and  Julian  ;  save  that  the  one  did  ac- 
tually go  over  to  heathenism,  and  was  willingly  re- 
ceived by  the  pagan  priests ;  the  other  would  have 
done  the  same,  but  was  not  admitted  by  them. 

Sect.  3.  Of  Gratian  and  Valentinian  the  Second. 
There    is    no    ])roof  that    their    father,  Valentinian 

the  First,   was   a   baptized   Christian   when   they 

were  born. 

I.  The  import  of  some  sayings  of  the  authors 
which  I  shall  have  occasion  to  produce  in  the  case 

^  Zosimi  Histor.  lib.  ii.  [cap.  29.  p.  150.  edit.  Reitemier,  S". 
1784.  where  consult  Heyne's  note  upon  the  passage,  at  p.  549.] 
1  Hist.  Eccl.  lib.  i.  cap.  5. 


Valentinian  the  First.  61 

of  these  two  emperors,  will  not  be  so  mtII  under-  chap.iii. 
stood  by  the  ordinary  reader,  unless   I   first  give  a  vea,-  after 
short   history    of  their  father  and  them,  as  far   as  ^,^',^3''^''' 
concerns  this  matter. 

Valentinian  the  First  came  from  a  mean  original 
to  tlie  imperial  dignity  •".  lie  gained  his  preferment 
by  degrees  in  the  army.  He  is  not  taken  notice  of 
by  the  historians,  till  such  time  as  being  an  officer 
in  the  guards,  when  Julian  came  to  the  crown,  he  261. 
lost  his  place  for  his  religion.  For  Julian  being  re- 
solved to  set  up  the  old  religion  again,  gave  order 
that  none  should  serve,  (especially  in  those  places 
nigh  his  person,)  but  such  as  would  go  to  the 
heathen  sacrifices,  and  partake  of  them. 

There  were  a  great  many  in  the  army,  by  this 
time,  well  instructed  in  the  Christian  religion,  who 
rather  than  go  to  this  sort  of  mass,  would  leave 
their  places.  Among  the  rest,  this  Valentinian  and 
Valens  his  brother  threw  away  their  sword-belts  ".  2f^4- 
Three  years  after,  both  these  brothers  came  to  be 
emperors.  For  Valentinian  being  chosen  by  the 
army,  chose  his  brother  his  partner  ;  and  leaving  him 
to  govern  the  East,  Avent  himself  to  govern  Rome 
and  the  western  j)arts. 

A  reader  that  is  not  well  acquainted  with  the 
custom,  that  persons  converted  in  those  times  had, 
of  delaying  their  baptism,  would  think  by  the  zeal 
for  Christianity  that  they  shewed  under  Julian,  that 
they  both  had  been  at  that  time  baptized.  But  it 
is  certain  they  were  not  both  ;  for  we  find  Valens 
baptized  afterward.  His  baptism  is  mentioned  by''  ^' 
the  historians,   because  of  an  unusual   and   wicked 

"'  Socrat.  Hist.  Eccl.  lib.  iv.  cap.  i.  n  Jbid.  lib.  iii.  cap.  13. 


6*2  Gratian,  and  Valentinian  the  Second. 

CHAP.ii I.  circumstance  of  it.  He  was  by  his  wife,  who  was  an 
Year  after  Ariaii,  pei'suaded  to  be  baptized  by  Eiidoxius  the 
sties'^"  Arian  bishop  of  Constantinople :  and  they  together 
prevailed  on  him  to  swear  at  his  baptism  °,  that  he 
would  always  continue  to  be  on  the  Arians'  side, 
and  expel  the  catholics  out  of  the  churches.  An 
impious  practice !  Instead  of  baptizing  into  the 
Christian  religion,  as  Christian,  to  baptize  into  a 
sect. 

But   Valentinian's   baptism    is   not   mentioned   at 
all   by  the   historians :    neither   should  we  be    sure 
whether  he  was  ever  baptized,   were  it    not   for  a 
passage  in  a   letter  of  St.  Ambrose,    which   I  shall 
have  occasion  to  cite  by  and  by.     He  was  born  in 
2'7-Pannonia,  a  country  wdiere  Christianity  had  at  that 
time    but    little    footing;  and    probably  of  heathen 
parents.     Who,  or  what  they  were,  we  hear  no  more 
than  that  his  father's  name  had  been  Gratian,  that 
he  was  nicknamed  Funarius,  and  that  he  had  been 
an  officer  in  Britain,  in  the  time  of  Constantino. 
259P-      II.  Now   as   to  his  sons  :  Gratian   was  p  born  to 
267r.  him  before   he  was  emperor  i,  and  on   the^  fourth 
year  of  his  reign   was   taken  by  him  into  partner- 
ship.    But  Valentinian,  his  younger  son,  was  born 
266«.  to  him  the  ^  third  year  of  his  reign  ;  so  that  he  was 
27;'. nine   years  old   when   his  father' died.     Ammianus 
Marcellinus  says  he  was  but  four.     But  it  must  be 
a  mistake,  both  because  Socrates"  names  the  consuls 
of  the  year   in  which    he    was    born,   which    were 
Gratian   and   Dagalaiphus,  for    the    year    of   Christ 
266. 366  ;  and  also    because   the   third   year  after,  369, 
this  vounff  Valentinian  was  consul  himself,  (accord- 

o  Theodoret.  Hist.  lib.  iv.  cap.   12,  13. 

q  Socrat.  lib.  iv.  cap.  lo.  "  Lib.  iv.  cap.  9. 


Gratian,  and  VaUntinian  the  Second.  63 

ing   to    the    custom    of    those    times,)    which    was  chap.iii. 
before  the  year  on  which  Ammianus  makes  him  to  Year  after 
be  bora.  ^  ^-Po- 

AVhen  Valentinian  the  elder  died,  the  army  pro- 11^ 
claimed  this  young   Valentinian   emperor,   together 
with   his  brother.     So   thev  ruled    the   West,   and 
their  uncle  Valens   the   East.     And    when  Valens 
died,    Gratian    quickly    after    chose    Theodosius    to  279. 
govern  the  East. 

Four  years  after,  the  usurper  TNIaximus  set  up  in  282. 
Britain  for  emperor.  And  when  Gratian  marched 
against  him,  his  army  deserting,  he  was  overcome 
by  IMaximus,  and  slain.  Valentinian  kept  Italy  and  283. 
some  other  countries  for  a  few  years ;  during  which 
time,  being  ruled  by  his  mother  Justina,  a  bitter 
Arian,  he  favoured  the  Arians,  and  persecuted  the 
catholics,  particularly  St.  Ambrose  bishop  of  JNIilan. 

Among  other  indignities,  he  summoned  St.  Am- 
brose to  come  and  dispute  before  him,  concerning 
the  faith,  with  Auxentius  the  iVrian  ;  and  he  wdth 
his  courtiers  would  judge  between  them.  To  which 
summons  St.  Ambrose  answers  in  a  ''letter  to  him  ; 
which  has  this  passage  in  it  to  our  purpose  : 

*  When  did  you  hear,  most  gracious  emperor, 
'  that  laymen  have  passed  judgment  on  a  bishop  in  a 
'  matter  of  faith  ?  Do  we  then  by  a  sort  of  fawning 
'  so  debase  ourselves,  as  to  forget  what  is  the  privi- 
'  lege  of  the  sacerdotal  office  ?  And  that  I  should 
'  commit  that  into  the  hands  of  another,  which  God 
'  has  intrusted  with  me  myself?  If  a  bisho})  must 
'  be  taught  by  a  layman,  what  will  follow  ?  Then 
'  let  a  layman  jireach,  and  the  bishop  give  attention ; 
'  let  a  bishop  learn  of  a  layman. 

'^  Ambrosii  Epist.  32.  [ep.  ?.  1 .  edit.  Benedict,  torn.  ii.  p.  S60.] 


64  Valentinian  the  Second. 

CHAP.iii.      '  This  is  unquestionable,  that  if  we  search  either 

Year  after  '  Juto  the  teuor  of  the  holj  scriptures,  or  into  the 

sties?'''     '  account  of  past  times,  there  is  none  can  deny  that, 

'  in   matters    of  faith,    /  say,  in    matters  of  faith, 

'  bishops   are   wont  to  judge  of  emperors  that  are 

'  Christians,  and  not  emperors  of  bishops. 

'  You  will,  by  the  grace  of  God,  arrive  to  a  better 
'  ripeness  of  age ;  and  then  you  yourself  will  pass 
'  an  estimate,  what  sort  of  man  for  a  bishop  he 
'  must  be,  that  will  put  the  sacerdotal  right  under 
'  the  judgment  of  laymen. 

'  Your  father,  a  man,  by  God's  mercy,  of  a  more 
'  advanced  age,  said,  "  It  does  not  belong  to  me  to 
'  judge  between  bishops."  Does  your  grace  now 
'  say,  "  It  does  belong  to  me  to  judge  ?"  And  he, 
'  though  at  that  time  baptized  in  Christ,  yet  thought 
'  himself  unable  to  bear  the  weight  of  so  great  a 
'  judgment.  Does  your  grace,  for  whom  the  sacra- 
'  7nent  of  baptism  is  yet  reserved  to  be  obtained  by 
'  you,  take  upon  you  the  determination  of  matters 
'  of  faith,  when  as  yet  you  are  not  partaker  of  the 
'  sacrament  of  faith  V 

This  scuffle  between  the  court  on  one  side  stand- 
ing for  the  Arians,  and  the  major  part  of  the  people 
on  the  other  for  their  religion,  their  church  and 
their  bishop,  increased  so  far,  (the  emperor  demand- 
ing the  church  for  the  Arians,  the  people  continuing 
day  and  night  in  it;  the  court  giving  out  that 
bishop  Ambrose  meant  to  set  up  for  an  usurper  y, 
St.  Ambrose  declaring,  that  as  he  abhorred  the 
thoughts  of  resistance^,  or  of  stirring  up  the  people, 

y  Anibrosii  Epist.  33.  [ep.  20.  edit.  Benedict.] 
^-  Idem,    Oratione    in    Auxentium.    [Op.  torn.  ii.  p.  863.  edit. 
Benedict.] 


Valentinian  the  Second.  Q5 

so  he  cotilcl  not,  on  the  other  side,  run  away  from  his  chap.iii. 
church  and  flock  in  that  danger  of  their  souls,  but  vear  after 
was  ready  to  suffer  death  quietly,)  that  Maxim  us  ^i^^^p*'" 
the  usurper,  who  had  already,  since  the  defeat  and 
death    of  Gratian,   settled    himself   in   Britain    and 
France,  and  gaped   for  an  opportunity  of  invading 
Italy,  took  his  advantage  of  these  discontents ;  and 
he  published  a  Declaration  in  behalf  of  the  true 
religion,  and  threatening  war  to  Valentinian%  if  he 
did  not  forbear  to  persecute  the  catholics. 

The  court,  for  all  their  anger  against  St.  Ambrose, 
yet  could  not  find  a  fitter  man  to  avert  this  storm 
than  he,  because  of  the  influence  which  they  thought 
he  might  have  upon  JNIaximus.  They  sent  him  there- 
fore on  an  embassy  of  peace.  Which  he  performed 
with  all  that  fidelity  that  became  a  good  Christian, 
who  would  shew  himself  loyal  to  his  prince,  that  had 
despitefully  used  him  and  his  religion. 

But  as  to  his  errand,  he  could  do  no  good  (for 
usurpers,  when  they  find  their  advantage,  do  not 
use  to  be  kept  back  by  reasons  of  conscience).  On 
the  contrary,  when  INIaximus  saw  that  St.  Ambrose 
would  not  communicate  with  him,  nor  with  the 
bishops  that  communicated  with  him,  he  commanded 
him  to  be  gone.  And  St.  Ambrose  sent  an  account 
of  his  embassy  to  Valentinian'*,  advising  him  to  look 
to  his  sd^iety,  Adversiis  hominem  pads  involucro  hel- 
ium tegentem^  '  against  a  man,  that  under  pretence 
'  of  peace,  [or  doing  good  oflfices,]  covered  his  design 
'  ofwar  [or  invasion].' 

And  so  it  proved :  Maxim  us  invaded  Italy ;  and 
Valentinian  had  nothing  to  do  but  to  fly. 

a  Theodoret.  Hist.  lib.  v.  cap.  14. 

b  Ambros.  Epist.  27.  [24,  in  edit.  Benedict.] 

WALL,  VOL.  II.  F 


66  Valentinian  the  Second. 

CHAP.iii.      But  Theodosius,  who  had,  ever  since  he  heard  of 

Year  after  the  death  of  Gratian,  resolved  to  revenge  it,  having 

sties*^"'     "^^   ^^®   army   ready,  came  from  the    East  ;   and 

though  the  usurper   had   strengthened  himself  by 

humouring    all    parties    of    Christians,  Jews,    and 

288.  Pagans  ;    yet    he    overcame    him,    slew   him,   and 

resettled  Valentinian,  and  brought  him  off  from  his 

fondness   to   the  Arians,  (his  foolish   mother  being 

now   dead,)    and   reconciled    him    to    St.  Ambrose, 

whom  he  ever  after  honoured  as  a  father. 

This  quietness  had  lasted  but  three  years,  when 
291. a  new  usurper  Eugenius  started  up;  with  whom 
Argobastes,  one  of  the  greatest  men  at  court,  trai- 
torously joined.  Valentinian,  being  then  in  France, 
was  seized  by  Argobastes,  and  after  a  while  mur- 
292-  dered  by  him.  This  was  in  the  year  392  ;  so  that 
he  was,  when  he  died,  twenty-six  years  old. 

III.  He  had,  a  little  before  this  treason  broke  out, 
resolved  to  be  baptized  before  he  went  for  Italy. 
He  had  a  particular  desire  to  receive  it  from  the 
hands  of  St.  Ambrose,  and  had  lately  sent  to  Milan 
to  him,  to  desire  him  to  come  and  give  it  him. 
St.  Ambrose  was  on  his  way  to  France  when  he 
heard  the  fatal  news,  which  rendered  his  journey 
now  too  late. 

One  shall  hardly  read  a  more  compassionate  la- 
mentation than  St.  Ambrose  makes  on  this  account 
in  his  funeral  sermon  for  Valentinian.  What  with 
the  object  that  was  present,  and  what  with  the 
occasion  it  gave  to  remember  Gratian,  he  says  all 
that  could  be  said  by  a  man  that  had  lost  his  own 
children  by  a  like  fate.  He  persuades  himself,  that 
if  he  could  have  arrived  before  the  murderous  blow 
was  given,  he  might  have  prevailed  with  the  tyrants 


Valentinian  the  Second,  67 

to  spare  his  life  at  least.     I  doubt  he  was  mistaken  c  hap.  iii, 
in  that ;  for  who  ever  read  of  an  Oliver  that  did  vear  after 
that  ?  ^^f  "P«- 

stle& 

But  as  to  Valentinian's  dying  unbaptized ;  he 
comforts  his  sisters,  that  were  present  at  the  ser- 
mon, by  assuring  them,  that  in  such  a  case  God 
accepts  of  a  sincere  faith  joined  with  a  hearty  desire 
of  baptism,  as  if  the  person  had  been  actually  bap- 
tized. Which  saying  of  his  is  often  cited  for  the 
resolution  of  like  cases.    '  I  hear,'  says  he,  '  you  are 

*  troubled  that  he  did  not  receive  the  holy  rites  of 

*  baptism.     Tell   me,    what  is   there    in   our  power 

*  but  the  will   and   desire?     And  he,  both  a  good 

*  while  ago  had  a  purpose  of  being  baptized  before 

*  he  returned   into  Italy ;  and  also  lately  expressed 

*  his  desire  of  being  baptized  by  me  :   and  it  was 

*  for  that  reason  especially  that  he  would  have  me 

*  sent  for. 

'  Hath  he  not  then  that  grace  which  he  desired, 

*  and  which  he  endeavoured  to  have  ?     Inasmuch  as 

*  he  desired  it,  he  has  received  it.' 

Upon  the  news  of  this  rebellion  and  murder, 
Theodosius  came  once  more  from  the  East,  and 
obtained  a  victory  over  Eugenius,  which,  (counting 
the  numbers  that  sided  with  Eugenius,)  the  histo- 
rians count  almost  miraculous,  and  slew  him.  As^94- 
for  the  traitor  Argobastes,  he  saved  the  hangman  a 
labour. 

And  this  was  one  of  the  last  good  acts  of  that 
noble  emperor.     He   died   quickly  after.     And  St.  295. 
Ambrose  had   the  sorrow  of  preaching  his  funeral 
sermon  too. 

I  cannot  but  observe  from  that  sermon,  the  dif- 
F  2 


68  Valentinian  the  Second. 

cHAP.iii.  ferent  grounds  on  which  8t.  Ambrose,  from  those  on 
Vear  after  which  Baronius  does  condemn  Maximus.  Baronius' 
sties^'""  way  is,  when  any  great  man  in  history  comes  to  an 
ill  end,  or  other  calamity,  to  find  something  in  his 
life  which  may  be  supposed  to  be  the  cause  for 
which  that  judgment  fell  on  him :  and  it  is  com- 
monly something  done  against  the  church  of  Rome. 
And  speaking  of  the  ill  end  of  Maximus,  when  he 
looks  backward  for  the  cause  of  it,  he  takes  no 
notice  of  his  rebellion  and  usurpation,  and  murder 
of  his  prince ;  like  the  man,  who,  pretending  to  tell 
the  faults  of  a  horse  that  he  sold,  forgot  to  mention 
that  he  was  blind  ;  and  observes  how  once  on  a 
time,  a  great  while  before,  being  appealed  to  by 
some  bishojis,  he  had  meddled  in  ecclesiastical 
matters  more  than  became  him  ^. 

But  St.  Ambrose,  in  the  foresaid  sermon '',  having 
spoken  of  Gratian  and  Theodosius  as  being  then 
in  heaven,  adds.  Contra  autem  Ma.vimus  et  Eugenius 
in  inferno,  docentes  e^cemplo  miserabili  quam  durum 
sit  arma  suis  principibus  irrogare.  '  But  Maximus 
'  and  Eugenius  are  now  in  hell,  teaching  by  their 
'  dreadful  example  how  heinous  a  thing  it  is  for 
'  men  to  bear  arms  ao^ainst  their  sovereio-ns.' 
IV.  From  this  whole  relation  it  appears, 

1.  That  Valentinian  the  younger  was  never  bap- 
tized. 

2,  That  Gratian  probably  was  baptized  some 
time  of  his  life  or  other.  Because  St.  Ambrose,  in 
Valentinian's  funeral  sermon,  makes  frequent  coni- 

<-■  Ad  annum  385. 

d  Orat.  in  funere  Theodosii,  [§.39.  Op.  torn.  ii.  p.  1209.  edit. 
Benedict.] 


Valentinian  the  First.  69 

parisons  between  the  two  brothers,  and  often  men- ch  a  p.m. 
tions  Valentinian's  want  of  baptism;  but  observes  year  after 
no   such   thing-  of  Gratian.     Besides,  he   calls  him 'i^*' ^p"- 
there  Fid elis ;  which  is  a  term  never  given  by  the 
ancients  but  to  a  baptized  person. 

But  yet  it  is  probable  his  baptism  was  not  in 
infancy.  For  what  should  make  Valentinian  the 
father  baptize  his  eldest  son  in  infancy,  and  not  his 
youngest  ?  Unless  we  may  judge  that  Justina,  the 
mother  of  the  youngest,  being  an  Arian,  (for  the 
mother  of  the  eldest  was  not  so,)  and  the  father 
himself  being  a  catholic,  they  could  not  agree  into 
which  faith  he  should  be  baptized.  For  the  Arians 
were  like  the  Donatists  for  that ;  that  they  had  so 
ill  an  opinion  of  baptism  given  by  the  catholics,  that 
they  baptized  such  over  again  ;  as  may  be  seen  by 
St.  Ambrose's  Discourse  against  Auxentius**.  And 
therefore, 

V.  3.  The  chief  question  is,  whether  Valenti- 
nian the  father  were  baptized  himself  at  the  time 
when  his  youngest  son  was  born.  We  have  heard 
already^,  that  he  was  a  baptized  Christian  at  a 
certain  time,  when  he  said,  that  '  he  did  not  think 
'  himself  fit  to  judge  between  bishops.'  But  what 
time  of  his  reign  this  refers  to  we  have  no  way  to 
know  certainly.  The  passage  that  looks  most  like  it 
in  all  that  we  read,  is  that  which  happened  at  the 
election  of  St.  Ambrose  himself  to  the  bishopric  of  274. 
Milan :  and  St.  Ambrose  was  more  likely  to  know 
that,  and  to  refer  to  that,  than  any  other.  For 
then,  as  Theodoret  tells  us^,  the  bishop  of  Milan 

e  Orat.  in  Auxentium,  in  fine.  [§.  37.  Op.  torn.  ii.  p.  874.  edit. 
Benedict.] 

'  §.  2  of  this  chapter.  S  Hist   Ub.  iv.  cap.  6. 


70  Theodosius. 

CHAP.iii.being  dead,  the  people  were  much  divided  about  the 
Year  after  choice  of  a  UBw  One,  some  setting  up  one,  and  some 
sties^^'  another:  so  that  to  avoid  confusion,  Valentinian 
ordered  the  neighbouring  bishops  that  were  then  in 
that  city  to  choose  one  for  them.  The  bishops  de^ 
sired  that  he  himself  would  pitch  upon  some  person. 
But  he  answered,  '  This  is  a  thing  too  great  for  me 

*  to  undertake.     You  that  are  filled  with  the  grace 
^  of  God,  and  illuminated  by  the  light  thereof,  may 

*  much  better  do  this  office  of  choosing  a  man  for  a 
■  bishop.' 

If  this  were  the  time  St.  Ambrose  means,  at 
which  he  was  then  a  baptized  person ;  this  was  but 
a  year,  or  thereabouts,  before  his  death :  for  St.  Am- 
2  74brose  was  made  bishop  in  the  year  of  Christ  374,  as 
Baronius,  or  the  beginning  of  375,  as  Petavius 
computes ;  and  Valentinian  died  November  the  17th, 
275-375. 

So  that  he  might  for  all  that  be  unbaptized  when 
266.  his   son   Valentinian   was   born,   which   was,   as   we 
said*',  nine  years  before,  viz.  anno  Dom.  366. 
Sect.  4.  Of  Theodosius  the  First. 
His  father  was  not  a  baptized  Christian  when  he 

was  born, 
I.  Theodosius,  (of  whom  we  had  occasion  to 
279.  speak  in  the  last  section,)  who  was  chosen  by 
Gratian  to  be  his  fellow  emperor,  is  another  of  the 
instances  of  persons  not  baptized  in  infancy.  What 
I  have  to  sa.y  of  him,  may  be  dispatched  in  a  few 
words.  He  was  baptized  quickly  after  he  was 
chosen  emperor*,  and  in  a  fit  of  sickness,  by  Acho- 
lius,  (or,  as  the  Greeks  write  his  name,  Ascholius,) 
bishop    of    Thessalonica :     being    then    thirty-four 

•^  §.  2.  i  Socrates,  lib.  v.  cap.  6. 


Theodosius.  71 

years    old,    as    Victor    counts;    forty-four    as    So-chap.iii. 
crates   reckons;    or   about   fifty,   if  the    Chronicon yg^r after 

Aledfmidrmum  be  to  be  relied  on.  the  apo- 

stles. 

II.  His  father,  Mho  was  also  named  Theodosius, 270. 
had  been  put  to  death  by  order  of  Valens  nine  years 
before.  At  what  time  of  his  life  he  was  baptized,  I 
think  we  should  not  have  known  but  for  Orosius, 
who  (because  he  was  a  Spaniard,  his  countryman) 
speaks  more  particularly  of  his  concerns.  So  that 
we  know  by  him  that  he  was  baptized  before  he 
died :  but  not  till  twenty-five  years  (by  the  lowest 
account)  after  this  his  son  was  born.  And  whe- 
ther he  was,  at  that  time  of  his  son's  birth,  a 
Christian  in  intention,  or  an  unbeliever,  is  not  to  be 
known. 

Orosius'  account  is  this*^;  that  he,  being  a  com- 
mander in  the  army,  had  done  good  and  faithful 
services:  but  yet  that  on  a  sudden,  and  for  what 
reason  nobody  knew,  there  came  an  order  that  he 
must  be  put  to  death.  Which  when  he  understood, 
'  he  desired  to  be  baptized  first,  for  the  forgiveness 
'  of  his  sins.  And  when  he  was  made  partaker  of 
'  that  sacrament  of  Christ,  as  he  desired ;  being, 
'  after  a  laudable  life  in  this  world,  secure  also  of 
'  an  eternal  life,  he  willingly  offered  his  neck  to 
'  the  executioner.' 

Other  authors,  though  not  mentioning  his  bap- 
tism, give  the  same  account  of  his  death.  And  the 
occasion  of  it  they  relate  to  be  such,  as  gives  us  an 
idea  of  the  mischief  that  superstitious  jealousies  do, 
when  they  get  into  the  head  of  a  cowardly  prince. 
Valens  had  had  some  attempts  made  to  dethrone 
him.  And  there  was  a  report  ran  up  and  down 
k  Hist.  lib.  vii.  [cap.  33.] 


72  5r.  BasiL 

CHAP.iii.  that  some  that  used  curious  arts  had  found,  that  he 
Year  after  ^^ould  quicklj  have  a  successor :  and  the  first  letters 
i^apo-  of  his  name  should  be  Theod.  The  names  of  Theo- 
dorus.  Theodoret,  Theodosius,  Theodulus.  6:c.,  were 
then  Terr  common  names.  And  this  fancy  cost  a 
great  many  of  them  their  lives :  and  this  captain 
among  the  rest.  His  son  Theodosius  was  not,  it 
seems,  at  that  time  a  man  noted  enough  to  come 
into  dancrer.  When  he  came  to  the  throne,  he 
managed  his  affairs  so  well  both  in  peace  and  war. 
that  none  that  went  before,  or  that  came  after,  did 
ever  excel  him. 

The  reason  why  he  was  not  baptized  in  infancy^ 
must  have  been  because  his  father  was  not  then 
baptized,  and  perhaps  not  a  behever.  I  know  that  So- 
crates (at  the  forecited  place,  lib.  v.  cap.  6.)  says,  that 
he  (the  said  emperor)  had  Christian  parents,  [or  an- 
C^Stors.j  avufdev  e*:  Trpoyoiwi'  "vpicmavos  irjrap-vwv'  But 
this  was  a  phrase  commonly  used  in  the  ease  of  those 
whose  parents  became  Christians  at  any  time  before 
their  death,  though  they  were  not  so  at  the  time  of 
the  birth  of  those  their  children :  as  I  shall,  out  of 
many  instances  that  mig-ht  be  given,  have  occasion 
to  give  some  presently. 

Sect.  5.  Of  St.  Basil. 

There  is  no  proof  to  the  contrary,  but  that  he  was 
baptized  in  Infancy. 

I.  I  did  in  the  tenth  chapter  of  the  First  Part  of 
this  work,  produce  the  evidences  that  are  in  anti- 
quity, that  St.  Basil  was  baptized  in  infancy.  But 
it  is  necessary  to  consider  those  also  that  are  brought 
to  the  contrary. 

I  know  of  but  one  man  of  the  antipaedobaptists 
that    does    pretend    him   for   an    instance    of   one 


St.  Basil.  73 

baptized  in  his  adult  age,  though  born  of  Christian  chap. in. 
parents  :  and  he  does  it  very  unfairly.     He  found  in  Year  after 
Osiander's^    epitome    of   the   Magdeburgenses,  that  J^Jg^'^P"' 
Vincentius  in  his  Speculum  tells  a  story  of  St.  Ba-  ^^°- 
sil's    going    to    Jerusalem,    and    being    baptized    in 
Jordan  by  Maximus,  the  bishop  there.     But  though 
Osiander  and  the  Magdeburgenses™   too   do,  when 
they  mention  this,  declare  that  this  is  a  story  of  no 
credit ;  and  that  Vincentius'  collection,  being  of  late  1144- 
years,  is  of  no  repute ;  and  that   there  is  no  histo- 
rian of  credit  or  antiquity  that  speaks  of  any  such 
thing :    yet  Mr.  Dan  vers"  sets  down  the  quotation 
in  such  manner  and  words,  as  if  they  had  recited  it 
as    a    credible    history:     whereas  they  do    both    of 
them,  at  the  places  cited,  declare  that  it  seems  to 
them    that  he  was  baptized  in  infancy  by  his  fa- 
ther, (of  which  I  also  have,  in  the  chapter  foremen- 
tioned,  given  some  confirmation,)  or  by  some  other 
minister. 

He  quotes  also  at  the  same  place,  and  for  the 
same  thing,  Socrates,  lib.  iv.  cap.  26,  and  Sozomen, 
lib.  vi.  cap.  34,  who  neither  there,  nor  any  where 
else,  have  any  word  tending  that  way. 

II.  As  Vincentius  made  his  collections  of  histo- 
rical matters  without  any  judgment,  taking  them 
out  of  any  sort  of  books,  genuine  or  spurious  ;  so 
the  author,  out  of  whom  he^*  owns  to  have  this,  is 
Amphilochius'  life  of  St.  Basil.  And  that  is  known 
by  all  to  be  a  Grub-street  paper,  a  gross  forgery; 


1   Cent.  4.  lib.  iii.  cap.  42. 

•n  Cent.  4.  cap.  lo.  [torn.  ii.  p.  941.  edit.  Basil.  1560.] 

"^  Treatise  of  Baptism,  part  i.  cap.  7.  [p.  60.] 

"  Vincentii  Speculum  Histor.  lib.  xiv.  cap.  78. 


74  St.  Basil. 

CHAP.iii.and  is  sufficiently  detected  to  be  such  by  RivetP, 
Year  after  Bai'onius^,  Bellarmin'",  Possevin,  and  before  them 
tti^s^'"     ^11'  by  bishop  Jewels 

The  author  thereof  had,  I  suppose,  read  or  heard 
that  Amphilochius,  bishop  of  Iconium,  had  wrote 
an  account  of  St.  Basil's  life,  (as  he  did  indeed,  and 
Gregory  Nazianzen  and  Gregory  Nyssen  did  the 
like ;  but  that  which  was  written  by  him  is  lost,  as 
are  most  or  all  his  other  works).  He  therefore  put 
forth  his  stuff  under  the  name  of  that  great  rhan. 
But  it  betrays  itself  by  many  tokens,  of  fabulous 
miracles,  incongruities  in  history,  &c.  And  in  that 
fable  which  he  gives  of  his  baptism,  there  are  such 
silly  monkish  quibbles  and  witticisms  put  into  the 
discourse  that  passed  between  Basil  and  Maximus, 
who  is  made  to  be  his  baptizer,  (as  one  asks,  Quis 
est  mundiisf  The  other  answers,  Qui  fecit  mun- 
diim,  &c.  ?)  that  one  might  guess  from  what  shop 
they  come. 

F.  Combefis  has  published  this  piece  in  Greek 
and  Latin,  and  endeavoured  to  vindicate  it  by  say- 
ing, the  main  part  of  it  might  be  genuine  though  it 
be  interpolated  and  mixt  with  some  fabulous  addi- 
tions: but,  as  Mr.  Du  Pin  observes  S  he  brings  no 
kind  of  proof  of  his  opinion. 

III.  The  true  account  wrote  by  Nazianzen,  Orat. 
30.  in  laiidem  Basilii,  nor  that  by  Nyssen,  have 
no  mention  of  any  such  thing ;  nor  that  under  the 
name  of  Ephraem   Syrus.     On  the  contrary,  Nazi- 

P  Crit.  Sacr.  lib.  iii.  cap.  27.  Q  Ad  annum  363. 

"^  De    Scriptoribus    Ecclesiasticis,    [§.  De  Amphilochio,   apud 
Op.  torn.  vii.  p.  68.  edit.  Colon.  1617.] 
s  Apolog.  Eccles.  Angl.  Artie,  i.  Div.  33. 
t  Nouv.  Biblioth.  torn.  ii.  Araphiloch. 


St.  Basil.  15 

anzen  seems  plainly  to  refer  to  his  baptism  in  in-CHAP.iii. 
fancy  by  his  own  father  ;  as  I  shewed  before.  Year  after 

Their  reciting  all  the  remarkable  passages  of  his^^g^^P''" 
life,  after  he  came  to  age,  without  mentioning  any 
thing  of  his  baptism,  is  a  strong  argument  that 
there  was  no  such  thing:  since  in  all  that  are  bap- 
tized at  age,  their  baptism  makes  a  considerable 
circumstance  for  a  writer,  whose  chief  subject  is 
their  Christianity.  And  therefore  the  monk,  who 
framed  a  life  for  him  that  might  sell  well,  would 
not  omit  it :  and  to  dress  it  up  the  better,  made  it 
to  be  in  Jordan,  where  Christ  was  baptized,  and 
Constantine  desired  to  be. 

IV.  If  the  twenty-ninth  chapter  of  St.Basil's  book, 
de  Spirifu  Sancto,  be  genuine,  (which  is  questioned 
by  Erasmus  and  others,)  then  it  is  certain  that  the 
same  man  that  baptized  him,  did  also  put  him  into 
the  ministry :  for  so  he  says  in  that  chapter.  He 
is  there  shewing,  that  the  custom  used  by  him  and 
the  churches,  of  saying  the  Doxology,  thus,  '  Glory 

*  be  to  the  Father,  and  to  the  Son,  with  the  Holy 

*  Spirit ;'  or  thus,  '  Glory  be  to  the  Father,  and  to 
'  the  Son,  and  to  the  Holy  Spirit,'  (instead  whereof 
the  Arians  would  have  him  say,  '  By  the  Son  in 
'  the  Holy  Spirit,')  was  no  innovation.  He  quotes 
several  ancient  authors  that  had  sj)oke  so  :  and 
begins  thus : 

'  I  myself,  if  it  be  proper  to  say  any  thing  of  my- 

*  self  in  this  case,  do  keep  the  use  of  this  expression 
^  wcnrep  riva  KXijpov  -TraTpwov,  as  an  inheritance  left  me 
'  by  my  father,  having  received  it  from  a  man  who 
■  lived  a  long  time  in  the  ministry  of  God,  by  whom 
'  I  was  both  baptized  and  also  put  into  the  ministry 

*  of  the  church.' 


76  St.  Gregory  Nazianzen. 

CHAP.iii.  This  could  not  be  Meletius,  (whom  Dr.  Cave 
Year  after  reckoiis  to  be  the  man  by  whom  he  was  ordained 
theapo.      deacon,)  because  he  afterwards  reckons  Meletius,  as 

sties.  '  ^ 

another  of  his  authors  for  the  same  usage ;  and 
says,  '  that  the  famous  Meletius  is  of  the  same 
'  sentiment,  they  that  have  conversed  with  him  do 
'  affirm.' 

That  St.  Basil  himself  did  use  to  baptize  children, 
I  shewed  before  in  the  First  Part  of  this  work,  ch.xii. 
f  9,  10. 

^.  VI.  Of  St.  Gregory  Nazianzen. 
He  was  not  baptized  in  infancy.     An  inquiry  whe- 
ther  his    father   was   a   Christian,  when  this    his 
son  was  born. 

^.  I.  When  fourteen  instances  are  produced  to 
prove  any  thing,  and  one  can  shew  that  thirteen 
of  them  are  mistakes,  he  is  apt  to  suspect  that  there 
is  some  mistake  in  the  other  two,  though  he  cannot 
find  it  out.  Yet  here  is  an  instance  of  a  Christian's 
son  not  baptized  in  infancy,  if  this  Gregory's  Car- 
men de  vita  s?m  be  a  genuine  piece,  (as  I  never 
heard  of  any  that  questioned  it,)  and  if  there  be  no 
mistake  in  the  reading  of  it. 

I  shall  represent  impartially,  and  as  briefly  as  I  can, 
the  proofs  that  are  brought  of  his  being  born  before 
his  father's  Christianity ;  and  those  to  the  con- 
trary. 

That  he  was  not  baptized  in  infancy  is  plain, 
both  from  the  foresaid  poem  de  vita  sua,  and  also 
from  the  sermon  that  he  made  at  his  father's  fune- 
ral ^  and  also  from  the  history  of  his  life  by  Gre- 
gorius  Presbyter.     For  in  all  these   a  full  relation 

u  Orat.  Tp.  [Orat.  [8.  edit.  Benedict,  fol.  1778.] 


Si.  Gregory  Nazianzen.  77 

is  given,  how  he,  in  a   voyage   by  sea  from  Alex-CHAP.iii, 
andria  to  Athens,  was  in  great  clanger  of  shipwreck  Year  after 
by  a  storm;  'and  whereas  all  the  rest  in  the  ship *j,gJ*P°" 

*  were  terrified  with  the  fear  of  their  bodily  death, 

*  I,'  says  he,  '  did  more  dreadfully  fear  the  death  of 
'  my  soul.     For  I  was  in  great  hazard  of  departing 

*  this  life  unbaptized  :  amidst  the  sea  waters  that 
'  were  to  be  my  death,  wanting  that  spiritual  water. 
'  And  therefore  I  cried  out,  entreated,  besought,  that 
'  some  space  of  hfe  might  be  granted  to  me.'  He 
goes  on  to  shew  how  his  lamentation  and  dread  on 
that  account  were  so  great  and  so  moving,  that  the 
people  in  the  ship  forgot  their  own  danger,  in  com- 
passion to  those  terrors  which  they  saw  were  upon 
his  soul.  And  how  he  then  vowed  to  God,  that  if 
he  were  delivered  from  that  danger,  he  would  ofl:er 
himself  up  to  God ;  and  did  so  accordingly. 

II.  That  his  father  was  not  a  Christian  when  he 
married,  nor  for  some  time  after,  is  plain  from  the 
said  funeral  oration'^.  He  was  of  the  religion  called 
Hypsistarian.  These  men,  as  is  there  related,  did 
so  renounce  the  worship  of  idols  and  sacrifices,  as 
that  they  retained  nevertheless  the  worship  of  fire 
and  torches. 

Mr,  Le  Clerc^,  being  busied  in  finding  contradic- 
tions in  the  Fathers,  thinks  he  has  found  one  here: 
because  Gregory  in  another  place  ^  says,  his  father 
lir'  eiSdoXoi?  7rdpo9  v^v  i^uxiov  which  he  translates,  '  was 
'  subject  to  the  idols  of  animals :'  not  minding  that 
^(locov  there  is  the  participle  of  the  poetical  verb  fwco 

'^  Orat.  19.  [or  18.] 

y  Life  of  Greg.  Naz.  Bibliotheque,  torn.  x. 
z  Carm.  i.  de    Rebus    Suis.    [Op.  torn.  ii.  p.  31.    edit.    Paris. 
1630.] 


78  St.  Gregory/  Nazianzen. 

CHAP.iii.and  not  the  genitive  of  X^wov  though  Bilius  had  noted 

Year  after    that  Criticism. 

sties''^^"  He  continued  in  that  superstition  till  the  year  of 

225.  the  council  of  Nice,  anno  Dom.  325.  His  wife  had 
before  used  her  persuasions  and  prayers  for  his 
conversion.  But  then,  when  Leontius  bishop  of 
Csesarea,  and  some  other  bishops,  were  going  by 
that  place  for  Nice  to  the  council,  she  got  them  to 
instruct  him  in  the  grounds  of  the  Christian  reli- 
gion ;  and  he  was  baptized  into  it  quickly  after  • 
and  not  long  after  that  took  priest's  orders :  and 
when  the  bishop  of  Nazianzum  died,  became  his 
successor.  In  which  office  he  lived  forty-five  years, 
and  died  near  100  years  old.  All  this  is  clear  in 
the  oration  aforesaid. 

III.  Now  the  question  is,  whether  our  Gregory 
his  son  were  born  before  that  his  father  s  conversion 
in  the  said  year  325,  or  after  ? 

And  the  solution  of  it  must  be  collected  by  know- 
ing, if  one  could,  how  old  he  [the  son]  was  when  he 
died.  For  we  know  justly  the  year  on  which  he 
died,  by  St.  Hierome,  who  wrote  the  tract  de  Scrip- 
toribus  Ecclesiast.^  the  fourteenth  year  of  Theodo- 
sius,  anno  392  ;  and  says  there  ^,  that  Gregory  Nazi- 
anzen had  been  dead  but  three  years.  He  died 
289.  therefore  in  the  year  389- 

The  difficulty  is,  to  know  what  age  he  was  of 
when  he  died. 

Gregorius  Presbyter,  who  wrote  his  life,  says,  he 
died  very  old.  And  Suidas  (who  mistakes  the  time 
of  his  death  two  years,  making  him  to  live  till  the 

a  [Hieronymus  de  Viris  illustribus.  Op.  torn.  ii.  edit.  Vallars.] 
Verb.  Hieronymus.  [cap.  135.] 
^  Verb.  Gregor.  [cap.  117.] 


St.  Gregory/  Nazianzm.  79 

thirteenth   year  of  Theodosius)    says,  that   he^  wascHAP.iii. 
then  ninety  years  old*^.     By  that  account  he  must  Year  after 
have  been  born  in  the  year  300,  which  is  twenty- *e^apo- 
five  years  before  his  father  was  a  Christian. 

But  Baronius*^  finds  reason,  as  he  thinks,  to  cor- 
rect this  chronology,  from  a  passage  out  of  Gregory 
himself;  who,  in  the  aforesaid  Carmen  de  vita  sua, 
speaking  of  his  studying  at  Athens,  and  of  his  reso- 
lution to  leave  that  place,  says,  it  was  then  his 
thirtieth  year  [or,  the  thirtieth  year].  This  Baro- 
nius  concludes  to  be  the  year  354,  by  Julian  the 
apostate's  being  a  student  there  at  the  same  time, 
(for  he  was  made  Csesar  and  sent  into  France  the 
next  year.)  From  whence  he  infers,  that  Gregory 
was  born  in  the  year  324,  (which  was  the  year  be- 
fore his  father's  conversion,)  and  that  he  was  but 
sixty-five  years  old  when  he  died. 

IV.  But  Papebrochius  in  his  Acta  Sanctorum 
Mali  octavo^  corrects  this  correction,  and  sets  the 
time  of  his  birth  back  to  the  old  account :  bringing 
a  great  many  probable  evidences  that  Gregory's  age 
must  be  greater  than  sixty-five  years ;  since  he  him- 
self so  often  speaks  of  his  being  unfit  for  business, 
by  reason  of  his  great  age. 

When  Maximus  the  cynic  opposed  his  being 
made  bishop  of  Constantinople ;  Gregory,  in  his 
oration  on  that  subject',  brings  in  his  adversaries, 
objecting  to  him  his  sickliness  and  old  age. 

When  he  desired  to  resign  the  said  bishopric, 
(which  was   eight  years  before   he  died,)   and  per- 281. 

c  Verb.  Vpr)yop.  d  Ad  an.  354.  et  389. 

e  Chronologia  vitse  Sancti  Greg,  expensa  et  emendata.    [apud 
Acta  Sanctorum  Maii,  torn.  ii.  p.  370.] 
f  Orat.  28.  [or.  26.  edit.  Benedict.] 


80  aS'i^.  Gregory  Nazianzen. 

CHAP.iii.  suaded   the  bishops  then  present  at  the  council  to 

Year  after  consent   to  his  SO   doing ;  he  used  this   argument : 

sties^^*^      *  Let  these  my  grey  hairs  prevail  with  you  s :'  which 

looks  as  if  he  were  then  more  than  fifty-seven  years 

old. 

This  learned  man  does  also  answer  the  reason 
that  Baronius  brings  to  the  contrary,  by  endeavour- 
ing to  shew  that  the  foresaid  mention  of  the  thir- 
tietli  year,  is  not  meant  for  the  thirtieth  year  of  his 
life,  (of  which  it  was  the  fifty-fourth,  as  he  thinks,) 
but  the  thirtieth  of  his  studies.  And  indeed  the 
words,  as  they  stand,  do  bear  that  sense  veiy  well ; 
they  are  these  : 

Kca  yap  TTokvs  rerpLTiTO  rots  Aoyots  XP^^'^^' 
7/877  ^ptaKoaTov  ixol  o-)(e8oz;  tovt  ^v  €tos. 
'  For  I  had  already  spent  a  long  time  in  study  of  learning  : 
'  This  was  almost  the  thirtieth  year  [or,  my  thirtieth  year.'] 

Gregorius  Presbyter,  who  wrote  the  life  of  St. 
Gregory,  and  took  it  for  the  most  part  out  of  his 
foresaid  poem,  seems  to  understand  it  so  :  and  yet 
his  words  are  capable  of  the  other  construction  too. 
He  expresses  it  thus  :  TpiuKoa-rov  t/Sij  TrXtjpeoa-a?  erog  ep 
Toh  fji.a6i]/ut.acriu'  '  Having  now  completed  thirty  years 
'  [or  else  his  thirtieth  year]  in  the  study  of  learning^.' 

Moreover  Rufinus,  who  was  contemporary  with 
him,  says',  he  died  jam  fessa  cetate,  '  being  spent 
'  with  age.'  Which  hardly  can  be  said  of  one  that 
was  but  sixty-five  years  old. 

These  reasons,  joined   with    some  others  of  less 

e  Orat.  32.  [or.  42.  edit.  Benedict.] 

^  In  vita  Gregorii,  [Operibus  ejus  prsefixa,  p.  cxxxii.  edit. 
Benedict.] 

•  Hist.  lib.  ii.  c.  9.  [See  the  two  books  added  by  Rufinus  to 
the  Ecclesiastical  History  of  Eusebius.] 


^S*^.  Gregory  Nazianzen.  81 

weight,  prevailed  with  Papebrochius  to  embrace  thecHAP.iii. 
old  account  as  the  truest,  viz.  that  he  was  ninety  year  after 
years  old  when  he  died;  and  consequently  that  he^^J'j^j'P"" 
was  born  anno  Dom.  300.     And  that  was  twenty-five 
years  before  his  father  was  a  Christian, 

Mr.  Le  Clerc,  who  writes  a  sort  of  life  of  this 
saint  k,  manages  this  argument  of  his  age  after  a 
heedless  and  absurd  manner.  For  first,  he,  follow- 
ing Pagi,  who  had  followed  Papebrochius,  says, 
that  he  was  born  anno  300,  which  is  twenty-five 
years  before  his  father's  conversion  :  and  accordingly 
supposes  with  the  foresaid  authors,  that  the  year  on 
which  he  left  Athens  was  the  fifty-fourth  of  his  age. 
And  the  use  he  makes  of  this  is,  to  '  wonder  that 
'  he  would  spend  so  great  a  part  of  his  life  in  study- 
'  ing  rhetoric,  forgetting  in  the  mean  time  all  care 
'  of  his  aged  parents,  and  of  the  church  of  God.' 
And  yet  afterward,  in  the  same  life,  he  '  wonders 
'  why,   since   it   was   the  opinion  of  that   age,  that 

*  those  that  die  unbaptized  are  damned,  his  father 
'  and  mother  being  such  zealous  Christians  did  not 

*  get  him  baptized  in  infancy.'  Which  is  to  suppose 
that  he  was  born  after  his  father's  conversion,  which 
he  and  every  body  place  at  the  year  325  ;  or  else  it 
is  the  wonder  of  a  man  that  doats.  One  of  these 
suppositions  helps  a  man  that  would  expose  Gre- 
gory to  censure ;  which  seems  to  be  the  design  of 
this  writer  of  lives  for  this  and  some  other  Fathers. 
And  the  other  serves  to  raise  objections  against  the 
universality  of  the  then  practice  of  pgedobaptism. 
But  it  is  very  unfair  to  serve  both  these  intentions 
from  this  instance ;  because   one   of  them  supposes 

^  Biblioth^qiie,  torn.  x. 

WALL,  VOL.  II.  G 


82  St.  Gregory  Nazianzen. 

ciiAP.iii.  him  to  be  born  after  his  father  was  a  Christian,  and 


Year  after  the  Other  twenty-five  years  before. 

sties^^"'  There  is  another  reason  to  make  one  believe  that 

he  was  born  before  his  father's  conversion ;  which 
is  this.  In  the  foresaid  oration  at  his  father's  fune- 
ral, he  tells  how  his  mother,  being  desirous  of  a 
son,  and  begged  one  of  God  in  her  prayers,  and  that 
in  answer  to  those  prayers  he  was  born  to  her. 
And  afterward  he  comes  to  speak  of  those  prayers 
that  she  made  for  her  husband's  conversion  :  in 
which  prayers  she  was  encouraged  to  the  greater 
hope  of  being  heard,  '  as  having,'  says  he,  '  already 
'  made  trial  of  the  Divine  liberality.'  On  which 
Bilius  makes  this  comment ;  '  namely,  when  she  ob- 
'  tained  her  son  Gregory  of  God,  by  her  prayers, 
'  as  he  had  said  a  little  before  '.'  And  indeed  that  is 
the  only  instance  mentioned  before  in  that  oration, 
to  which  one  can  suppose  him  to  refer. 

Also  this  reason :  he  often  mentions  his  mother's 
pious  and  Christian  care  and  dedication  of  him  to 
God  in  his  infancy,  and  from  the  womb  '",  but  never 
any  such  thing  of  his  father. 

V.  These  reasons  would  be  sufficient  to  sway  a 
man  to  believe  that  he  was  born  before  his  father 
was  a  Christian ;  were  it  not  for  one  that  seems 
very  plain  to  the  contrary.  And  that  is  a  passage 
in  the  foresaid  poem,  where  Gregory  the  elder 
earnestly  persuades  his  son,  who  had  more  mind  to  a 
private  life,  to  become  his  assistant  in  the  office  of 
bishop  of  Nazianzum.  He  uses  all  the  force  of 
paternal  authority,  requiring  him,  ujion  pain  of  the 
loss  of  his  blessing,  to  comply  with  his  desire,  and  to 

1  Annot.  in  loc. 

m  Orat.  Apologet.  [Orat.  ii.  edit.  Benedict.]  et  alibi. 


St.  Gregory  Nazianzen.  83 

relieve  his  old  age  :  and,  among  the  rest,  has  these  chap.iii. 

words":  Year  after 

^v  „  ,  ,  „,  theapo- 

yJvTKti  ToaovTov  eK[Jt,eix€Tpr}Kas  piov,  sties. 

"Ocros  bcrjXOe  OvcriGiv  kjxol  \p6vor 

Aos  T-i]v  \a.pLV,  80'?. 

So  many  years  of  life  you  have  not  seen 
As  I,  your  father,  have  in  orders  been. 
Do  me  the  kindness,  do. 

Papebrochius  does  take  notice  of  this  place,  and 
says,  it  has  puzzled  every  body  that  has  read  it. 
He  goes  about  to  ansM^er  it  by  supposing  the  word 
Ovaccov  is  misprinted,  and  that  it  should  be  inja-iwu. 
But  he  produces  no  manuscript  in  favour  of  his 
amendment:  and  if  one  were  to  amend  by  the  sense 
without  any  book,  I  should  think  rather  that  Ova-iwv 
has  crept  in  by  mistake  for  itoXlwv  ;  (or,  for  the  verse 
sake,  Twv  TToXiodv :  for  he  often  here  lets  an  anapsestus 
go  for  the  fourth  foot  of  his  iambic ;)  the  sense  ac- 
cording to  the  editions  is,   '  Your  life  is   not   of  so 

*  many  years,  as  are  the  years  of  my  "sacrificing ;' 
i.  e.  officiating  in  the  priest's  office  :  which  is  a  sense 
very  difficult  to  reconcile  in  history  with  truth. 
That   of  Papebrochius  ;  '  You  are  not  so  old  as   I 

*  am  ;'  is  true  :  but  a  poor  sense.     '  You  are  not  so 

*  old  as  my  grey  hairs  are,'  is  to  the  purpose  of  the 
father's  argument  at  that  place. 

Bishop  Hall  had  found  out  this  place  ^,  when  he 
sought  for  instances  of  clergymen  that  had  made 
use  of  the    marriage-bed   after  they  were    in    holy 

n  Carmen  de  vita  sua,  vers.  520.  circiter  pag  6.  edit.  Paris. 
1610.  [p.  9.  edit.  Paris.  1630.] 

"  Honour  of  the  married  Clergy,  [maintained  against  the  ma- 
licious challenges  of  C.  E.  Masse-priest,]  lih.  ii.  §.  8.  [8vo.  Lend. 
1620.  reprinted  in  his  Works,  fol.  1624.  p.  709,  &c.] 

G  2 


84  St.  Gregory  Nazianzen. 

CHAP.iii.  orders  (of  which  this  is  the  plainest  that  he  can 
Year  after  ^^^^)'  ^nd  the  antipsedobaptists  have  taken  it  from 
the  apo-     Jiifi, .  and  made  use  of  it  for  their  purpose. 

VI.  If  this  pass  for  current,  then  we  must  say 
that  Baronius'  account  of  his  age  is  the  truest ;  and 
further,  that  he  was  yet  two  or  three  years  younger 
than  he  makes  him.  For  if  he  had  been  full  thirty 
years  old  at  the  year  354,  he  would  still  have  been 
born  a  little  before  his  father's  baptism,  and  two 
years  before  his  ordination.  But  the  words  are 
a-ye^ov  rpiaKoa-rov,  '  almost  the  thirtieth  ;'  which  in  a 
poem  may  indeed  pass,  though  he  were  but  twenty- 
seven  or  twenty-eight. 

We  must  say  likewise,  that  all  that  he  himself, 
and  Rufinus,  and  Gregorius  Presbyter,  do  speak  of 
his  old  age,  must  be  understood  of  a  prcematura 
senectus,  caused  by  his  sickliness,  which  he  often 
mentions.  And  that  Suidas,  when  he  makes  him 
live  to  ninety  years  old,  mistakes  at  least  twenty- 
seven  years :  which  might  possibly  be,  since  he 
880.  wrote  600  years  after  Gregory  was  dead  :  and  that 
what  he  himself  says  of  his  mother's  experience  of 
the  Divine  liberality,  before  her  husband's  conver- 
sion, must  refer  to  something  else.  And  that  Gre- 
84o.gorius  Presbyter,  (who  also  lived  near  6OO  years 
after  St.  Gregory,)  if  his  meaning  be  to  speak  of  the 
time  when  he  left  Athens  and  went  home,  as  the 
thirtieth  year  of  his  studies,  must  be  mistaken  by 
taking  what  Gregory  himself  had  said  of  the  thir- 
tieth year,  for  the  thirtieth  of  his  studies,  (as  others 
have  since  done,)  which,  according  to  this  supposi- 
tion, must  be  but  almost  the  thirtieth  (viz.  the 
twenty-seventh  or  twenty-eighth)  of  his  life.  And 
that    Mr.  Du  Pin    (who    has    gone    a    middle    way. 


St.  Gregory  Nazianzen.  85 

making  him  to  be  born  anno  318?,  which  falls  seven chap.iii. 
years  before  his  father's  baptism,)  does  yet  place  his  Year  after 
birth  eight  or  nine  years  too  soon.     For  if  he  was*®^?"" 
born  after  his  father's  priesthood,  it  must  be  anno 
327  or  326  at  soonest.     And  possibly  the  numerical 
figure  in  the  text  of  Mr.  Du  Pin  is  mistaken  by  the 
printer :  for  in  the  index  at  the  end  of  the  tome,  it 
is  printed  328.     And  according  to  this  account,  he 
was  but  sixty-one  or  sixty-two  when  he  died.     And 
his  father  and  mother  (for  they  were  much  of  one 
age)  were  about  fifty,  when  he  [the  son]  was  born. 
Which  is  old  for  a  woman  to  have  children  :  and 
yet  she  had  one,  if  not  more  children,  after  her  son 
Gregory. 

And  then  also  we  must  say,  that  this  Gregory 
the  elder  was  as  singular  in  this  practice  of  keep- 
ing his  children  unbaptized  ;  as  Mr.  Johnson  i  has 
shewed  him  to  be  in  the  point  of  passive  obedience : 
and  as  the  papists  will  say  he  was  in  getting  chil- 
dren after  his  being  in  holy  orders. 

I  hope  the  reader  will  pardon  the  length  of  this 
disquisition,  and  the  uncertain  issue  of  it  at  last : 
for  he  will  perceive  by  it  how  diflflcult  it  is  to  find 
the  birth  or  age,  even  of  such  whose  later  years 
have  been  never  so  well  noted.  I  lighted  on  one 
thread  more,  which  I  thought  might  have  directed 
in  this  labyrinth.  I  observed  that  St.  Gregory  once 
speaks  of  St.  Basil,  as  having  been  about  the  same 
age  with  himself.  For  he  says  at  the  end  of  the 
funeral  oration'',  which  he  makes  for  him,  '  This 
'  elogium  is  given  thee,  O  Basil !  by  a  tongue  that 

P  Nouvelle  Biblioth.  torn.  ii. 

q  Julian  the  Apostate,  [chap  ix.  8vo.  Lond.  1682.] 

•■  Orat.  20.  [Or.  43.  edit.  Benedict.] 


86  St.  Gregory  Nazianzen. 

CHAP. III. '  was  wont  to  be  most  acceptable  to  thee,  koi  6/ulo- 

Year  after  '  Ti/uov  Ka\  rjXiKo^,  and  by  One  of  the  same  function, 

sties!^^"      '  ^^^^  o^  ^^^®  same  age  with  thee.'     If  then  I  could 

find  St.  Basil's  age,  it  would,  I  thought,  direct  me 

in  that  of  his  friend  Gregory ;  at  least  so  near,  that 

we  should  not  mistake  thirty  years.     But  I  cannot 

find  readily  the  account  of  St.  Basil's  age  any  more 

than  of  the  other,  and  am  quite  out  of  the  humour 

of  entering  on  a  new  search  after  any  body's  age. 

279-  St.  Basil  died  379,  (the  first  day  of  that  year).    This 

was  ten  or  eleven  years  before  Gregory  died.     St. 

289.  Basil,  as  well  as  St.  Gregory,  is  often  spoken  of  as 

an  old  man  ;  and  yet  by  this  last  account  he  must 

be  but  fifty-one,  or  thereabouts,  when  he  died. 

But  then,  on  the  other  side,  that  same  oration  on 
St.  Basil  (in  which  Gregory  mixes  so  many  of  his 
own  concerns,  that  it  is  a  sort  of  history  of  both 
their  lives)  does  by  many  circumstances,  too  little 
and  too  long  to  be  repeated,  shew  that  they  were 
254.  but  young  men  when  they  left  Athens.  He  says, 
that  when  they  declared  their  purpose  of  returning 
home  from  thence ;  not  only  all  their  intimates  '  and 
'  equals  of  the  same  age  with  them,  ^'Xt/ce?,'  but  also 
many  of  the  doctors  there,  expressed  a  great  regret 
at  their  leaving  the  university  so  soon,  being  very 
unwilling  to  part  with  them.  Which  makes  it  pro- 
bable that  they  themselves  were  but  young  masters 
of  arts ;  and  so  confirms  Baronius'  opinion,  that 
they  were  but  thirty,  or  almost  thirty,  and  not  fifty- 
four,  as  they  must  have  been  by  the  other  account. 

Besides,  St.  Gregory  in  that  oration  recounting 
the  great  examples  of  Christian  fortitude  that  had 
been  in  Basil's  family,  and  speaking  of  the  great 
persecution   that  was  in  Pontus  under  Maximinus, 


St.  Gregory.   Gorgonia.  87 

relates  how  great  a  share  the  grandfathers  of  Basil  chap. in. 
had  in  it.     Whereas  if  St.  Basil  himself  had  then  Year  after 
been  about  ten  years  old,  (as  he  must  have  been  by^^j^^"P°" 
the  first  account,)  his  father,  rather  than  his  grand- -'o- 
fathers,  would  have   been  likely  to   be   mentioned. 
I  said  in  the  former  editions,  that  that  one   plain 
place    aforesaid,    which    makes    this    Gregory   born 
after  his  father's  baptism  and  ordination,  did  seem 
to  oversway  all  the  reasons  of  chronologers  to  the 
contrary.     But   I   have   since   minded    another   ab- 
surdity that  attends  it.     St.  Hierome  de  Scriptori- 
hus  Eccl.    speaks    of  Gregory   as    having    been    his 
master :  '  Prseceptor   mens,    quo    scripturas    expla- 
'  nante,  didici.'     Now  St.  Hierome  himself  was  born 
in  the  year  329,  and  it  is  not  likely  that  he  would 
speak  so  of  one  that  was  but  four  years  older  than 
himself.     Perhaps    it    may  be    more    likely   that   a 
word  may  be  misprinted,  than  so  many  absurdities 
allowed.     I  shall  determine  nothing,  but  leave  it  to 
others. 

VII.  The  antipaedobaptists  have  taken  notice  of 
no  other  children  of  that  Gregory  the  elder,  but 
this  his  son  Gregory.  But  he  had  two  other  chil- 
dren, a  daughter  Gorgonia,  and  a  son  Csesarius. 
There  is  no  account  whether  Gorgonia  were  elder  or 
younger  than  her  brother  Gregory;  save  that  Elias 
Cretensis  (if  he  knew  any  better  than  we)  makes 
her  to  be  younger^.  If  she  were  elder,  she  must 
have  been  born  before  her  father  was  a  Christian  ; 
since  it  is  the  hardest  matter  that  may  be  to  bring 
her  brother  Gregory's  years  within  that  com})ass. 
However   that   were,  she  was   not   baptized   in   in- 

s  Comui.  in  Greg.  Naz.  Orat.  19.  [apud  Greg.  Op.  torn.  ii. 
p.  761.  edit.  Paris.  1630.] 


88  ;S'i!;.  Gregory.   Gorgonia.   Ccesarius. 

CHAP  III.  fancy  ;  and  being  afterward  left  to  her  own  discre- 
Vear  after  tion,  she  did  not  receive  baptism  till  a  little  before 
sties*^""  ^^^®  died*,  when  she  was  so  old  as  to  have  grand- 
children, whom  she  had  instructed  in  the  Christian 
faith.  Her  husband  also,  whom  she  had  married 
(as  it  seems  by  her  brother  s  words  at  her  funeral) 
while  he  was  a  heathen,  was  by  her  prevailed  on  to 
be  baptized  with  her.  8he  died  before  her  father, 
who  died  before  St.  Basil.  And  since  St.  Basil  died, 
as  was  said,  on  New  Year's  Day  379,  it  seems  to 
have  been  375  at  the  soonest,  when  she  died.  Her 
brother  Gregory  was  then,  by  the  last  account  of 
his  age,  but  forty-eight.  It  is  very  unlikely  then  that 
she  was  younger,  having  then  grandchildren  of  such 
an  age. 

Caesarius  was  younger  than  either  of  them,  and 
died  the  first  of  them.  And  though  Gregory's  words 
at  his  funeral  ^,  concerning  his  baptism,  are  not  very 
plain  for  the  time  of  it :  yet  they  seem  to  intimate 
that  he  had  then  lately  received  it.  And  indeed  (to 
observe  this  here  once  for  all)  the  far  greatest  part 
of  those  that  M^ere  not  baptized  in  infancy,  but  were 
left  to  take  their  own  time  for  it,  we  find  to  have 
put  it  off  from  time  to  time  till  they  were  appre- 
hensive of  death,  excepting  such  as  went  into  orders, 
or  the  like.  But  we  find  no  baptized  person,  ex- 
cept this  Gregory,  that  did  so  leave  his  children 
unbaptized. 

If  all  the  children  of  this  elder  Gregory  were 
born  after  their  father's  Christianity,  and  yet  left 
unbaptized ;  it  is  the  instance  but  of  one  man's 
practice.     And   there  is   some   more    excuse   for   a 

t  Naz.  Orat.  in  Laudem  Gorgonise,  [Orat.  8.  edit.  Benedict.] 
u  Orat.  in  Laudem  Ca?sarii,  [Orat.  7.  edit.  Benedict.] 


Nectarius.  89 

bishop,  or  other  minister  to  do  this,  than  for  other chap.iii. 
men;  because  if  his  children  fall  sick,  or  into  any  Year  after 
sudden  danger  of  death,  he  is  ready  at  hand  in  the  ^Jig^"^"' 
house  to  give  them  baptism. 

It  was  probably  from  some  compliance  with  this 
practice  of  his  father,  that  St.  Gregory,  in  one  of 
the  places  that  I  quoted-"^,  gives  that  opinion,  which 
is  singular  in  him  ;  that  '  it  is  a  good  way  if  a  child 
^  appear  not  to  be  in  any  danger  of  death,  to  defer 
'  his  baptism  for  some  time.'  He  mentions  three 
years  or  thereabouts.  And  as  he,  at  the  same  place, 
advises  and  counts  it  necessary,  '  if  it  be  in  danger 
'  of  death,  to  baptize  it  immediately :'  so  it  is  pro- 
bable the  same  w^as  his  father's  opinion  ;  and  that 
this  his  son  had  no  sickness  in  his  infancy,  and  so 
he  thought  he  might  defer  the  baptizing  him. 

That  many  people  in  this  time  delayed  and  put 
off  the  baptizing  of  their  children  something  longer 
than  ordinary,  not  out  of  principle  that  so  they 
ought  to  do,  but  out  of  negligence,  and  a  procrasti- 
nation which  they  themselves  owned  to  be  blame- 
able  ;  appears  plainly  by  that  common  and  pro- 
verbial speech,  which  Isidore  (speaking  of  Zippo-312. 
rah's  circumcising  her  child)  mentions^;  and  says, 
'  was  used  to  be  said  in  time  of  danger:  "God's 
'  judgments  come  upon  us  ;  let  us  baptize  our  chil- 
'  dren  out  of  hand."  ' 

Sect.  7.  Of  Nectarius. 
There  is  no  appearance  of  his  parents  being  Chris- 
tians, nor  knowing  who  they  were. 

I.   Though    St.  Gregory    Nazianzen,    who,    after 
his   father's   death,   was    bishop    of  Constantinople, 

"^  Part  i.  ch.  1 1.  §.  7.  y  Isidor.  Pelusiot.  lib.  i.Ep.  1  25. 


90  Nectarius. 

CHAP.m.bad  done  more  for  the  restoring  the  catholic  faith 
Year  after  there,  than  had  been  done  by  any  man  in  so  short 
sties!'"'  ^  time ;  yet  he  found  a  necessity  of  resigning  the 
place.  Partly  by  reason  of  his  age  and  infirmity; 
and  partly  for  that  there  was  such  a  contention  in 
the  council  of  bishops  about  him.  Some  said  it  was 
not  canonical,  that  he,  having  once  accepted  another 
bishopric  formerly,  should  remove  from  it.  Others, 
that  he  living  as  a  hermit,  wholly  given  to  study 
and  prayers,  was  not  at  all  dexterous  in  makino-  his 
court  with  the  emperor  for  the  good  of  the  church  : 
neither  had  he  any  good  mien,  but  a  contemptible 
presence. 

To  allay  these  heats,  he  did  what  St.  Clement^  had 
advised  in  such  a  case  to  be  done.  He  willingly 
abdicated,  and  said,  '  If  this  contention  be  upon  my 
'  account,  I  am  ready  to  depart ;  only  let  the  flock  of 
*  Christ  be  in  peace  **.' 

And  when  they  were  in  consultation  about  an- 
other to  be  chosen ;  whom  should  they  light  on  but 
one  Nectarius,  a  layman  of  Tarsus,  of  a  senator's 
rank,  remarkable  for  a  grave  and  comely  presence, 
but  of  no  learning  or  skill  in  divinity  !  The  em- 
peror liked  this  man  so  well,  that  he  was  finally 
chosen.  They  did  the  gentleman  a  great  diskind- 
ness ;  for  of  a  creditable  and  graceful  alderman,  they 
made  of  him  a  very  insipid  bishop. 

But  what  is  to  our  purpose  is  this;  Nectarius, 
though  he  was  by  belief  and  profession  a  Christian, 
yet  had  not  been  as  yet  baptized  ^.  They  were 
forced,  having  baptized  him,  to  give  him  ordination 

z  Clemens  Romanus,  Epist.  i.  ad  Corinth,  cap.  54. 

a  Naz.  Orat.  ad  150  Episcopos.  [Or.  43.  edit.  Benedict.] 

b  Socrat.  Hist.  Eccles.  lib.  v.  [cap.  8.]  Sozom.  lib.  vii.  [cap.  8.] 


St.  Chrysosiom-  91 

a  few    days    after,  notwithstanding    the    apostolical  chap. in. 
canon  against  choosing  a  novice  for  a  bishop.  Year  after 

II.  The  antipaidobaptists  wonld  make  an  argu- ^^  ,^^'''" 
ment  from  hence,  that  his  parents  must  have  been 
of  their  persuasion,  since  they  had  not  baptized  him 
in  infancy.  But  first  they  ought  to  shew  that  his 
parents  were  Christians  :  since,  as  I  said  before,  half 
the  world  at  this  time  were  such  as  had  been,  since 
they  came  to  age,  converted  from  heathenism,  and 
liked  Christianity ;  but  the  greater  part  of  them  did 
put  off  their  baptism  from  time  to  time  for  a  long 
while.  And  one  might  name  several  beside  this 
man,  that  were  pitched  on  by  the  people  for  bishops 
before  they  were  baptized  ;  some,  whose  parents  are 
known  to  be  heathens ;  and  some,  whose  parents 
are  not  at  all  mentioned  in  history;  so  that  it  is 
impossible  to  know  what  religion  they  were  of.  But 
they  do  not  make  instances  for  this  purpose,  unless 
they  are  proved,  at  least  by  probable  arguments,  to 
have  been  born  of  Christians. 

As  for  Nectarius'  parents,  we  know  nothing  of 
their  religion.  And  I  believe  it  is  as  hard  to  find 
who  they  were,  as  it  is  to  know  who  was  Homer's 
or  Job's  father. 

Sect.  8.  Of  St.  John  Chrysostom. 

His  parents  were  probably  heathens  at  the  time 

of  his  birth. 

I.  Among  all  the  ancient  Fathers,  there  is  none 
that  has  had  so  many  to  write  his  life  as  St.  Chry- 
sostom. For,  besides  that  Palladius,  who  lived  to- 
gether with  him,  has  wrote  his  Dialogue  purposely 
on  that  subject ;   the  ancient  historians,  who  lived 


92  St.  Chrysostom. 

CHAP.iii.nigh    his   time,   Socrates^    Sozomen^,   Theodoret^ 

Year  after  ^c.,  havG  giveii  a  larger  account  of  him  than  of  any 

Stles^^*'       other  man.     And   in    the    middle    ages,   there    are 

abundance  that  have  wrote  tracts  of  the  same  :  but 

these  latter  have  intermixed   several   fables,  which 

are  disproved  by  the  elder. 

Of  these  Palladius  says*^,  that  he  was  baptized  by 
Meletius,  bishop  of  Antioch,  after  he  had  been  in- 
structed by  him  three  years  in  the  Christian  reli- 
gion. And  though  none  of  the  other  ancient  writers 
do  mention  this  his  baptism  at  man's  age ;  yet  it  is 
very  probable,  since,  as  far  as  we  can  learn,  his 
parents  were  heathens  at  the  time  of  his  birth. 
520-  Georgius,  patriarch  of  Alexandria^,  and  Metaphras- 
tes,  do  say  they  were ;  and  they  are  not  in  this 
contradicted  by  those  elder. 

II.  His  father  Secundus  died  presently  after  he 
was  born ;  as  he  himself  intimates,  lib.  i.  de  Sacer- 
dotio.  His  mother  Anthusa  was  a  Christian  when 
274-  this  her  son  was  twenty  years  old :  but  that  is  no 
argument  that  she  or  her  husband  were  so  at  the 
254-  time  of  his  birth.  At  that  time  the  heathens  turned 
Christians  as  fast  as  the  papists  in  England  turned 
protestants,  in  the  time  of  the  reformation.  And 
even  at  that  time,  when  her  son  was  twenty  years 
old,  though  she  was  then  a  Christian  in  belief,  yet 
the  aforesaid  historians,  Georgius  and  Metaphrastes, 

c  Lib.  vi.  [cap.  2,  &c.]  ^  Lib.  viii.  [cap.  2,  &c.] 

e  Lib.  V.  [cap.  27,  &c.] 

'  DiaL  de  vita  Chrysostomi,  [apud  Chrysost.  Op.  torn.  xiii. 
edit  Montf.] 

g  Vita  Chrysostomi,  [apud  Chrysost.  Op.  torn.  viii.  p.  157. 
edit.  Saville.] 


St.  Chrysostom.  93 

say,   that    she   was    not   baptized    till   her   son    was  chap.  iii. 
baptized  first.     They  say  it   of  liis  parents   in   the  Year  after 
foresaid  life,  that  they  were  baptized   by  Meletius  *''*' ^p*'- 
after   their  son.     But  it  could  be  true  only  of  his 
mother,  his  father  beincv  dead  lonor  before. 

I  believe  the  antipgedobaptists  would  not  have 
conceived  that  they  had  ground  enough  to  make 
Chrysostom  one  of  their  instances,  if  they  had  not 
been  encouraged  thereto  by  Grotius.  And  what  he 
says  is,  that  '  he  being  born  of  Christian  parents, 
'  as  the  truer  opinion  is,  and  educated  by  Meletius, 
'  yet  was  not  baptized  till  the  twenty-first  year  of 
'  his  afje''.' 

That  he  was  born  of  Christian  parents  he  brings 
no  proof  at  all.  And  it  is  little  to  the  purpose  that 
he  was  educated  by  JMeletius.  As  bishops  do  not 
use  to  take  infants  to  nurse,  (though  lads  or  young 
men  to  educate  they  may,)  so  in  this  case  it  appears 
that  Chrysostom  was  twenty,  or  at  least  eighteen 
years  old,  before  he  came  to  Meletius.  And  then 
Meletius  did  with  him  as  any  bishop  now  would  do 
with  a  young  man  that  had  been  brought  up  in 
heathenism  :  he  instructed  him,  and  when  he  had 
continued  a  catechumen  three  years,  baptized  him. 

That  he  was  so  old  as  I  say,  before  he  came  to 
Meletius,  is  plain ;  because  by  all  the  accounts  he 
came  not  to  him  till  he  forsook  the  school  of  Liba- 
nius,  the  heathen  master  of  rhetoric.  And  that  he 
continued  his  hearer  till  that  age,  appears  by  what 
he  himself  writes,  Orationc  1.  ad  viduam  juniorem ; 
where  speaking  in  praise  of  those  women  that  con- 
tinue widows,  and  how  they  are  valued  even  among 
heathens,  he  tells  this  story ;  '  For  I  formerly,  when 

^  Annot.  in  Matth.  xix.  13. 


94  St.  Chrysostom. 

CHAP.  III. '  I  was  yoimi^,  took  notice  that  my  master,  wlio  was 
Year  after  '  0116  of  the  most  superstitioiis  men  that  ever  lived, 
sdes?^''"  '  ^^^  "^-^noh  admire  my  mother.  For  as  he  asked 
'  some  that  were  about  him  who  I  was,  and  one 
'  made  answer  tliat  I  was  a  widow- woman's  son ;  he 
'  asked  me,  how  old  my  mother  was,  and  how  long 
'  she  had  been  a  widow.  And  when  I  told  him  that 
'  she  was  forty  years  old,  and  that  it  was  twenty 
'  years  since  she  buried  my  father ;  he  was  much 
'  affected  at  it,  and  s])eaking  aloud  to  those  that 
'  were  present,  "  Strange,"  says  he,  "  what  brave 
'  women  there  are  among  the  Christians  ! "  ' 

Some  chronologers  find  it  more  agreeable  with  the 
computation  of  time  to  suppose  that  it  was  not  full 
twenty,  but  eighteen;  which  by  a  round  number 
he  here  calls  twenty.  But  it  is  much  one  to  this 
purpose. 

The  saying  of  Libanius  seems  to  suppose  that 
Anthusa  had  been  a  Christian  now  for  a  consider- 
able time,  or  at  least  that  he  took  it  so.  But  as 
he  knew  nothing  of  her  concerns  till  that  moment ; 
her  professing  of  Christianity  at  that  time  was 
enough  to  make  him  say  what  he  did,  without 
making  any  inquiry  how  long  she  had  been  of  that 
profession. 

Some  readers  also  will  be  apt  to  conclude,  that 
Chrysostom  had  been  at  that  time  but  a  little  while 
a  hearer  of  Libanius,  (from  whence  it  would  follow 
probably  that  Anthusa  was  a  Christian  when  she 
first  sent  her  son  to  this  school,)  because  Libanius 
did  not  at  this  time  know  who  he  was.  But  the 
nature  of  those  auditories  or  lectures  was,  that  one 
from  one  part  of  the  city,  and  another  from  another, 
came  on  the  weekly  lecture  days  to  hear,  and  sent 


St.  Chrysostom.  95 

their  contributions:  so  that  a  lad  or  a  man  might  chap.  iii. 
be  a  hearer  for  a  long-  time  before  the  master  had  Year  after 
any  ))ersonal  knowledge  of  him.     The  word  [school]  *Y  ^^'"" 
being  otherwise  used  in  our  time,  might  be  apt  to 
make  this  mistake.     But  it  is  to  be  taken  in  the 
ancient   sense,   as   in  Acts  xix.  9-     The    school    of 
Tyrannns  was  not  a  college  of  lads  under  his  care, 
but  a  place  of  public  lectures  that  he  kept. 

III.  There  is,  on  the  contrary,  reason  to  think  that 
she  was  not  a  Christian  when  she  consented  that 
her  son  should  hear  this  master,  who  was  a  spiteful 
enemy  to  the  Christian  religion.  And  as  this  is 
probable  of  itself,  so  it  is  made  more  than  ])robable, 
that  not  only  she,  but  her  son  himself  also,  was 
a  heathen  when  he  came  first  to  hear  bim,  by 
what  Sozomen  affirms,  viz.  that  '  On  a  time  when 

*  Libanius  was  like  to  die,  some  of  his  friends  asked 
'  him  who  he  thought  fit  should  be  his  successor? 
'  And  he  answered,  "  John"  (meaning  this  John, 
'  who  came  afterward  to  be  called  Chrysostom) 
'  "  should    have    been    the    man,   if  the    Christians 

*  had  not  stole  him  away  from  us  ^" '  The  word 
is  ea-vXita-av,  '  robbed  us  of  him :'  which  argues  that 
he  was  a  heathen  before. 

IV.  Mr.  Du  Pin,  m  the  notes  he  gives  upon 
what  he  had  said  of  Chrysostom*^,  says,  that  'some 

*  writers  make  his  parents  to  be  heathens ;  but 
'  that  he  himself,  in  the  first  sermon  against  the 
'  'Avo/jLoioi,  says,  that  "  he  was  bred  up  and  nourished 

*  in  the  church ;"  and  that  it  appears  out  of  his  first 
'  book  de  Sacerdotio,  c.  1.  that  his  mother  was  a 
'  Christian  when  his  father  died,  which  was  quickly 
'  after  she  was  delivered  of  him.' 

i  Hist,  lib.viii.  c.  2.        ^  Nouvelle  Biblioth.  torn,  iii   in  Chrvsost. 


96  St.  Chrysostom. 

CHAP.iii.  Having  a  great  regard  to  every  thing  tliat  tins 
Year  after  excellent  autlior  says,  I  read  over  on  purpose  both 
sties?^"'  those  tracts.  And  in  the  sermon  found  nothing  that 
seemed  to  relate  any  thing  at  all  to  this  matter;  so 
that  I  believe  there  must  be  some  mistake.  Also  in 
the  first  chapter  of  the  book  cited,  there  is  nothing 
at  all  of  the  matter.  That  which  I  guess  the  most 
probable  to  be  meant,  is  chap.  ii.  where  Chrysostom's 
mother,  earnestly  entreating  him  not  to  leave  her, 
recounts  to  him  the  great  troubles  she  had  under- 
gone about  his  estate  and  education  in  her  widowhood ; 
and  yet  that  she  had  kept  herself  a  widow,  and  had 
gone  through  the  brunt  of  all  these  fatigues  ;  '  In 
'  the  first  place,'  says  she,  '  being  assisted  by  the 
'  help  [or  influence]  that  is  from  above,  vtto  ti}^ 
'  avwOev  ^orjOoufxeui]  poTrri<i'  and  then  also  the  com- 
^  fort  which  I  had  by  the  continual  sight  and  com- 
*  pany  of  you,  my  son,  did  not  a  little  contribute 
'  to  it.' 

But  here  is  nothing  but  what  might  be  properly 
said  by  a  Christian  woman  in  reference  to  those 
times  in  which  she  had  been  a  heathen  :  since  God 
almighty  employs  his  providence  in  relieving  the 
necessities  not  only  of  Christians,  but  of  all  men 
and  other  creatures  that  know  him  not.  She  does 
not  mention  in  all  that  long  speech  any  praying 
to  God,  or  use  of  his  word,  that  she  had  made  in 
those  days ;  which  to  me  is  a  greater  proof  that  she 
was  not  at  that  time  a  Christian,  than  the  foresaid 
words  are  that  she  was. 

At  least  here  is  nothing  that  can  nio-h  counter- 
vail  the  argument  from  the  foresaid  words  of 
Libanius  concerning  this  John's  heathen  profession 
at  first,  rehearsed  by  Sozomen.     And  Sozomen  is  a 


St.  Amlrose.  97 

good  witness  in  this  case,  having  lived  })art  of  liis  tHAP.iii. 
time  together  with  Chrysostom.     For  he  had  wrote  vear  atter 
several  books  before  that  history;  and  he  had  com- 'ji^j^^^"^" 
pleted  that  history  in  440.     So  that  he  must  have  340. 
been  born  before   St.  Chrysostom   died,   which   was 
anno  407-  307- 

Sect.  9.  Of  St.  Ambrose. 

There  is  no  account  of  his  parents  being  Christians 

at  the  time  of  his  birth. 

I.  St.  Ambrose's  case  is  just  the  same  with  that 
of  Nectarius.  And  he  himself,  after  he  had  heard 
how  Nectarius  was  chosen  bisho])  of  Constantinople, 
said,  '  I  was  utterly  unwilling  to  be  ordained ;  and, 
'  when  there  was  no  remedy,  desired  that  at  least 
'  my  ordination  might  be  delayed  for  a  longer  time. 
'  But  the  rule  of  the  church  could  not  prevail ;  the 
'  force  of  the  people  prevailed.  Yet  the  western 
'  bishops  have  approved  of  my  ordination  by  their 
'  consent;  and  the  eastern  by  their  doing  the  same 
•  thing  ^'  The  rule  or  prescription  that  he  speaks 
of  is  that  mentioned  by  St.  Paul,  1  Tim.  iii.  6,  which 
canon,  it  seems,  the  people  would  by  force  have  to 
be  dispensed  with,  when  they  had  an  extraordinary 
opinion  of  a  man. 

He  was  a  layman,  and  was  governor  under  Va- 
lentinian  the  emperor,  of  some  provinces  of  Gallia 
Cisali^ina :  and  when  the  people  of  JMilan  (which 
was  one  of  the  cities  under  his  government)  were, 
after  the  death  of  Auxentius  their  bishop,  in  a  tu- 
mult about  choosing  another,  he  came  to  keep  the 
peace,  and  persuaded  tliem  to  quietness  and  concord. 
He  spoke  to   them  so   handsomely  and  so  gravely, 

'  Epist,  82.  ad  Vercellens.  Eccles.  [Epist.  63.  edit.  Benedict.] 

WALL,   VOL.   II.  H 


98  St.  Ambrose. 

CHAP.iii.  that  all  parties  agreed  on  a  sudden  to  pitch  upon 

Year  after  him  for  bisliop  "*.     He  opposed  it  what  he  could  : 

sties^^"'      ^"*  *^®y  ^®"^   *^  ^^^  emperor  for  his  consent,  be- 

^74- cause  he  was  at  that  time  the  emperor's  minister. 

And  he  said,  '  He  was  very  glad  that  the  men  he 

*  chose  for  governors   were    so    well   liked   by  the 

'  people,  that  they  would  choose  the  same  for  bi- 

'  shops/     So  he  gave  his  consent,  but  yet  he  would 

not  determine  the  choice,  as  being  a  thing  out  of 

his  sphere.     He   ordered  the  bishops  then  present 

in  or  about  the   city  to   direct  the  choice  of  the 

people,  who  continued  resolute  for  Ambrose.     But 

Ambrose  was   not  as   yet   baptized.     He  received 

baptism  at  the  hands   of  Simplicianus  ",  and  within 

eight  days  was  ordained  bishop. 

II.  Our  business  being  to  inquire  why  he  was 
not  baptized  in  infancy  ;  the  antipsedobaptists  would 
have  it  that  he  was  born  of  Christian  parents :  and 
some  of  them  stick  not  to  say,  that  Paulinus  in  his 
life  says  he  was.  But  Paulinus  does  not  say  so. 
What  he  says  of  his  father  is  this,  that  he  was  a 
nobleman  of  Rome,  and  governor  of  Gallia.  But 
he  was  the  less  likely  to  be  a  Christian  for  that : 
233-  the  senate  and  great  men  of  Rome  being  the  last 
body  of  men  in  the  empire  that  came  over  to  the 
^91- Christian  faith.  Insomuch  that  a  long  time  after 
this,  when  St.  Ambrose  was  an  old  man,  Valen- 
tinian  the  second  had  much  ado  to  withstand  the 
attempt  made  by  the  senate  to  bring  again  into 
fashion  the  lieathen  worship.     So  says  St.  Ambrose 

i»  Paulinus  in  vita.  [Ambrosii,  apud  Op.  tom.ii.  Append, 
edit.  Benedict.]  Rufinus,  Hist.  Eccl.  lib.  ii.  c.  1 1 .  Socr.  lib.  iv. 
c.  30.    Sozomen.     [lib.  vi.  c.  24.]  Theodoret.  lib.  iv.  c.  6. 

n  Augustin.  Confess,  lib.  viii.  c.  2. 


Si.  Ambrose.  99 

at  his  funeral,  'Before  his  death  he  refused  to  grant <^'H^p'"- 
'  the  privileges  of  the  temples,  when  such  men  stood  Vear  after 
'  up  for  them,  of  whom  he  might  well  be  afraid,  sties^.^''' 
'  Whole  crowds  of  heathen  men  came  about  him  ; 
'  the  senate  petitioned.  He  was  not  afraid  for  the 
*  sake  of  Christ  to  incur  the  displeasure  of  men".' 
And  if  one  may  guess  by  circumstances,  he  lost  the 
empire  and  his  life  in  this  quarrel ;  Eugenius  the 
usurper,  that  prevailed  against  him,  having  all  the 
heathen  party  on  his  side  :  who  restored  those  hea- 
then altars  which  Valentinian  had  denied,  and  set 
up  temples  of  Jupiter  p.  And  Argobastes  had  threat- 
ened, if  he  overcame  Theodosius,  to  make  the  great 
church  at  Milan  (the  St.  Paul's  of  that  city)  '  a 
'  stable  for  his  horses  <i ;'  because  they  would  not 
communicate  with  Eugenius,  nor  receive  his  offer- 
ing, as  being  an  usurper.  But  better  news  came  to 
town  quickly,  as  I  shewed  before  in  the  history  of 
Valentinian  '". 

I  bring  in  this  to  shew,  that  when  Paulinus 
makes  St.  Ambrose's  father  to  have  been  a  great 
man  at  Rome ;  that  is  no  argument  that  he  M^as  a 
Christian.  But  indeed  Paulinus,  or  whoever  wrote 
that  life,  (for  Erasmus  *  takes  it  to  be  a  forgery  of 
some  late  monk,  as  I  observed  before,)  knew  so 
little  of  his  father's  concerns,  that  he  did  not  know 
his  name.  He  makes  his  name  to  be  Ambrosius, 
because  the  son's  was  so  :  but  his  name,  if  his  son 

"  Orat.  in  obituni  Valeiitiniani.  [Op.  torn.  ii.  p.  i  173,  &c.  ed. 
Benedict.] 

1'  Paulinus  in  vita  Ambrosii,  [Op.  torn.  ii.  Append,  edit. 
Benedict.] 

1  August,  de  Civitate  Dei,  lib.  v.  c.  26.  '"  Sect.  iii.  §.  3. 

■^  Censura  prefixa  operibus  Ambrosii. 
H    2 


100  St.  Hierome. 

CHAP.iii.knew  better*,  was  Symmachus.  Though  the  life- 
Year  after  writers  copjing  One  out  of  another,  do  to  this  day 
the  apo-     call  him  Ambrosius.     He  seems  to  have  died  while 

sties. 

St.  Ambrose  was  young. 

But  at  the  time  when  St.  Ambrose  was  come  to 
man's  estate,  Paulinus  does  indeed  say  that  his 
mother  was  a  widow,  and  dwelt  at  Rome,  and  was 
then  a  Christian :  if  that  would  avail  any  thing  to 
prove  that  her  husband  or  she  were  so  formerly, 
when  he  was  born. 

III.  On  the  contrary,  a  strong  proof  that  they 
were  not,  is  that  which  he  says  of  himself,  that  he 
was  not  brought  up  in  the  bosom  of  the  church. 
For  in  his  second  book  De  Pcenitentia,  cap.  8, 
speaking  of  his  own  unworthiness,  and  unfitness  to 
be  a  bishop,  he  says  it  will   be  said  of  him,  '  Ecce 

*  ille,  non  in  ecclesiae  nutritus  sinu,'  &c.     '  Lo  !  this 
'  man  that  was  not  brought  up  in  the  bosom  of  the 

*  church,'  &c. 

As  for  what  St.  Ambrose's  own  thoughts  were 
of  the  necessity  of  infant-baptism,  it  appears  by  his 
words  cited  before  ",  that  he  made  it  a  great  ques- 
tion, '  whether  a  child  could  be  saved  without  it.' 

Sect.  10.  Of  St.  Hierome. 

There  is  no  proof  to  the  contrary,  but  that  he  was 

baptized  in  infancy. 

I.  St.  Hierome,  who  wrote  the  lives  of  several 
persons  of  note  that  had  been  before  him,  found 
none  of  the  ancients  that  came  after  him  so  kind 
as  to  write  his :  for  that  life  which  was  formerly 
published  with  his  works  is  a  mere  fable.  Yet  he 
having  wrote  a  great  many  occasional  letters,  which, 

t  Ambros.  Orat.  in  obitum  Satyri.  [Op.  torn.  ii.  p.  i  113,  &c.] 
"  Part  i.  chap.  13.  §.  2. 


St.Hierome.  101  . 

for  the  goodness  of  the  style,  and  the  learning  con-CHAP.iir. 
tained  in  them,  are  preserved  ;    many  of  the  chief  y^ar  after 
passages  of  his  life  may  be  picked  out  of  them.  the  apo- 

In  all  that  he  has  said  of  himself,  or  the  anony- 
mous author  of  the  life  aforesaid,  or  any  body  else 
has  said  of  him  ;  there  is  no  ground  to  question 
his  baptism  in  infancy,  except  an  obscure  passage, 
mentioned  twice  in  the  same  words,  and  those  am- 
biguous ones,  in  two  letters  that  he  wrote  to  pope 
Damasus. 

The  occasion  was  this:  St.  Hierome  being  re- 260. 
tired  from  Rome  into  Syria,  in  order  to  lead  a 
monk's  life  there,  found  the  people  of  those  parts 
much  divided ;  not  so  much  in  opinions  of  religion, 
as  in  disputing  which  of  several  that  were  set  up 
was  the  lawful  bishop  of  Antioch,  with  whom  they 
ought  to  hold  communion.  Some  acknowledged 
Meletius ;  others  refusing  him,  followed  Paulinus ; 
and  others  adhered  to  Vitalis. 

And  another  difficulty  was  ;  they  thereabouts  ex- 
pressed their  faith  in  the  Trinity  by  acknowledging 
three  hypostases.  Being  asked  by  the  Latins  what 
they  meant  by  hypostases ;  they  answered,  Personas 
subsiste7ites, '  persons  subsisting.'  St.  Hierome  and  the 
other  Latins  answered,  that  they  had  the  same  faith^ 
and  owned  '  three  persons  subsisting.'  This  was  not 
enough ;  they  would  have  them  express  the  word 
itself,  three  hypostases.  St.  Hierome  scrupled  the 
doing  that,  because  hypostasis  among  secular  au- 
thors had  signified  substance  or  essence  :  and  '  who,' 
says  he,  '  will  with  a  sacrilegious  mouth  preach  up 
'  three  substances  ?'  And  again,  *  If  any  one  by 
•  hypostasis,    meaning    ova-lav,    essence,    [or   being,] 


102  St.  Hierome. 

CHAP.iii.'  does  not  confess  that  there  is  but  one  hypostasis 

Year  after  '  i^  three  pevsous  ',  he  is  estranged  from  Christ.' 

sties?^"  About  these   things  he  writes  to  Damasus,  who 

272- had  in  the  mean  time  been  made  bishop  of  Rome^ 

desiring  to   know  whether  he   and    the   church    of 

Rome  (for  he  is  resolved  to  go  by  their  example) 

do  allow  of  this  word  hypostasis  for  person.     And 

also  which  of  the  foresaid  parties,  viz.  of  Meletius, 

Paulinus,  or  Vitalis,  they  would  communicate  with  : 

for  he  would  do  the  same.     '  And  this  I  do,'  says 

he,  'inde  nunc  mese  animse  postulans  cibum,  unde 

'  olim  Christi  vestimenta  suscejn.     "  Desiring   now 

'  food   [or  instruction]  for  my  soul,  from  that  place 

'  where  I  formerly  took  upon  me  the  garments   of 

'  Christ." ' 

This  letter  not  procuring,  as  it  seems,  an  answer 
so  soon  as  he  expected,  he  writes  another,  Epist.  58, 
[16  ed.  Bened.]  to  the  same  purpose ;  desiring  him 
with  greater  importunity  to  give  him  his  answer. 
In  which  he  uses  the  same  motive  :  but  expressed 
in  words  so  just  the  same,  that  one  gives  no  light 
to  the  other.  '  Ego"  igitur,  ut  ante  jam  scripsi, 
'  Christi  vestem  in  Romana  urbe  suscipiens,'  &c. 
'  I  therefore,  who,  as  I  wrote  before,  took  on  me 
'  the  garment  of  Christ  in  the  city  of  Rome,'  &c. 
From  this  place  Erasmus y  raised  a  conjecture 
141 2- that  he  was  baptized  at  Rome.  And  if  so,  he  could 
not  be  baptized  in  infancy:  for  he  was  born  at 
Stridon  in  Dalmatia;  and  did  not  come  to  Rome 
till  he  was  big  enough  to  go  to  the  grammar 
school. 

And  what  Erasnius  spoke  doubtfully,  other  fol- 

"  Epist.  57.  [  5.  in  edit.  Vallarsii.]  y   In  vita  Hieronymi. 


St.  Hierome.  lOS 

lowing  writers  of  this  Father's   life,  Baronius,   Duchap.iii. 
Pin,  Dr.  Cave,  &c.  have  (as  it  happens  in  relating  Year  after 
matters)  told  as  an  absolute  unquestioned  things.       the  apo- 

That  w^hich  Erasmus  says  is  this ;  '  He  means 
'  his  baptism  by  that  taking  on  him  Christ's  gar- 
'  ments :  for,  I  think,  he  does  not  mean  it  of  his 
'  receiving  priest's  orders ;  but  in  baptism  there 
'  was  a  white  garment  given  them.' 

He  might  have  been  sure  enough  that  he  did  not 
mean  it  of  the  habit  of  a  priest ;  for  St.  Hierome 
was  not  as  yet  ordained  priest,  when  the  letter  was 
writ:  and  wdien  he  was  ordained,  it  was  not  at 278. 
Rome,  but  at  Antioch  by  Paulinus,  to  whose  com- 
munion Damasus  had  it  seems  advised  him. 

II.  But  there  was  another  sort  of  habit  or  arar- 
ment,  which  he  had  then  already  put  on,  and  which 
he  knew  to  be  very  much  valued  by  Damasus,  whose 
acquaintance  he  now  sought,  and  which  he  probably 
took  upon  him  at  Rome,  (for  he  took  it  on  him  in 
his  younger  years  %  and  it  was  at  Rome  that  he 
spent  those,)  and  that  was  the  habit  of  a  monk, 
which  he  then  wore  when  he  wrote  that  letter. 
And  it  is  a  great  deal  more  likely  that  he  means 
that,  than  the  albes  which  were  worn  but  a  few 
days.  Especially  since  neither  he,  nor,  I  think,  any 
other  author,  among  all  that  variety  of  expressions 
which  they  use  for  denoting  baptism,  do  ever  use 
that  phrase  of  recewing  the  garments  of  Christ. 
Because  the  ordinary  Christians  did  not  use,  for 
constant  wearing,  any  particular  garment  as  a  badge 

z  [See  likewise  the  same  asserted  and  defended  by  his  last 
editor  Vallarsius,  in  the  life  prefixed  to  vol.  xi.  of  his  works, 
chap.  3.  p.  17—19.] 

^  See  §.  5. 


104  St.  Hierome. 

CHAP.iii.  of  their  religion.     But  the  monks  and  virgins  that 
Year  after  had  professed  peq3etual  virginity,  did  at  that  time 
sties?"'"      (^^  ^^^^  been  usual  ever  since)  wear  a  peculiar  habit, 
as  a  token  of  their  profession. 

Of  which  if  any  one  doubt,  it  must  be  one  that 
has  never  read  any  thing  in  St.  Hierome  :  for  he, 
being  given  to  an  overweening  opinion  of  that  w'ay, 
mentions  it  with  great  eulogiums  on  every  turn. 
And  as  he  calls  the  persons,  servos  Christi,  and 
Christo  sacratos,  '  servants  of  Christ,'  and  '  con- 
'  secrated  to  Christ :'  and  the  virgins,  virgines 
Dei,  '  God's  virgins,'  (as  if  married  people  did  not 
belong  to  God  or  Christ  at  all :)  so,  what  is  most 
to  our  purpose,  he  commonly  calls  that  peculiar  sort 
of  coat  that  the  virgins  or  nuns  wore,  Christi  tuni- 
cam^  '  the  coat  or  garment  of  Christ.'  And  the 
veil,  fiammeum  Christi,  'the  veil  of  Christ.'  Of 
each  of  which  I  will  give  one  instance. 

In  his  epitaphium,  or  funeral  oration,  in  praise 
of  Paulla^,  he  recounts  how  desirous  she  had  been 
in  her  lifetime  that  her  children,  and  those  that 
belonged  to  her,  should  take  on  them  that  habit 
and  profession  of  renouncing  the  world,  and  leading 
a  single  life,  as  she  had  done  that  of  a  widow;  and 
how  she  had  in  great  measure  her  desire :  for  be- 
sides that  Eustochium  her  daughter  was  then  a 
professed  virgin,  her  granddaughter  also,  by  her 
only  son  Toxotius,  being  then  a  child,  was,  by  her 
parents,  Christi  jiammeo  reservata,  '  designed  to 
'  wear  the  veil  of  Christ.' 

And  in  his  letter  to  Eustochium*^,  the  subject 
whereof  is,  de  virginitate  servanda,  to  exhort  her 
to  continue  constant  and  unstained  in  her  purj)06e 

b  Epist.  27.  [108.  ed.  Vallars.]  c  Epist.  22.  [22.] 


St.  Hierome.  105 

of  perpetual   virginity,  he   says,   '  It  is  not  fitting,  chap.iii. 
'  when  one  has  taken  hold  of  the  plough,  to  look  year  after 

*  back ;  nor   being    in   the   field,   to   return   home ;'  ^^^^^^^' 

*  nee  post  Christi  tunicam  ad  tollendum  aliud  vesti- 
'  mentum  tecto  descendere :'  '  nor  after  one  has  put 

*  on  the  coat  of  Christ,  to  come  down  from  the  roof 
'  to  take  any  other  garment.' 

Since  these  expressions  are  the  very  same  with 
those  that  he  used  before  of  himself;  it  is  probable 
that  those  also  are  to  be  understood  of  the  monk's 
habit :  or  at  least,  it  is  not  at  all  necessary  that  they 
must  be  understood  of  his  baptism  at  Rome.  And 
if  they  be  not,  then  there  remains  no  kind  of  ground 
to  doubt  of  his  being  baptized  at  Stridon  in  infancy, 
as  other  Christian  children  were.  For  neither  Eras- 
mus, nor  any  of  those  that  have  followed  him,  have 
brought  any  other  proof  but  these  words ;  and  had 
it  not  been  for  them,  no  man  had  ever  had  such 
a  surmise. 

III.  Baronius    does   indeed    say,  that  '  after   he 

*  was  baptized,  he  presently  reformed  his  life,  which 
'  before  he  had  led  in  some  lewdness :  and  whereas 

*  he  had  lost  the  first  virginity,  he  kept  undefiled 
'  that  which  he  calls  the  second,  which  is  after 
'  baptism^.' 

If  this  were  true,  or  could  be  proved,  the  question 
were  at  an  end.  But  there  seems  to  be  no  more 
ground  for  it  than  that  Baronius,  having  first  taken 
for  granted  from  Erasmus'  conjecture  that  he  was 
baptized  at  man's  age,  thought  it  more  decent  to 
lay  that  fornication,  of  which  he  is  known  to  be 
guilty,  rather  before  his  baptism  than  after. 

The  tract  of  St.  Hierome  to  which  he  refers  for 

d  Ad  ann.  372. 


106  St.  Hieronie. 

CHAP.iii.the  proof  of  this,  is  his  '  Apology  made  for  his 
Yea,,  after  '  books  that  he  had  wrote  against  Jovinian.'  In 
the  apo-      which  there  is  indeed  mention  of  those  '  two  sorts 

sties. 

*  of  virginity,'  and  there  is  also  a  confession  of  his 
own  loss  of  virginity.  But  it  is  in  several  clauses 
or  paragraphs  that  he  mentions  these  two  things ; 
and  not  so  as  to  affirm,  or  intimate  that  he  could 
claim,  either  of  the  said  sorts  of  virginity  himself. 
I  think  not ;  yet  it  may  be  proper  to  lay  before  the 
reader  the  places  themselves. 

He  had  been  accused  by  a  great  many,  that  in 
the  said  books  against  Jovinian  he  had  so  exces- 
sively commended  virginity,  that  he  had  in  some 
expressions  represented  all  marriage  as  sinful ;  for 
which  accusation  he  had  indeed  given  too  much 
occasion.  Yet  he  vindicates  and  explains  the  places 
excepted  against  as  well  as  he  can.  And  then  says, 
'  This  therefore  I  protest,  and  make  it  my  last 
'  declaration,  that  I  did  not  then  condemn  mar- 
'  riage,  nor  do  now  condemn  it.  Virginity  I  do 
'  extol  to  the  sky ;  not  that  I  am  possessed  of  it,  but 
'  that  I  the  more  admire  a  thing  that  I  myself  have 
'  not.  It  is  an  ingenuous  and  modest  confession  to 
'  commend  highly  that  in  others  which  one  has  not 
'  one's  self.  Must  not  I,  because  being  of  a  gross 
'  body  I  am  fain  to  go  on  the  ground,  admire  that 
'  faculty  that  the  birds  have  of  flying  in  the  air; 
'  and  envy  the  pigeon,  which 

'  Radit  iter  liquidum,  celeres  neque  commovet  alas.' 

'  With  stretched  out  wings  glides  through  the  yielding  sky  ?' 

•  Let  no  man  deceive  himself:  nor  let  him  undo 

*  himself  by  hearkening  to  a  soothing  flatterer.     The 
'  first  virginity  is  that  which   is  from   one's  birth  : 

*  the    second    is    that   which   is  from    one's   second 


St.  Hierome.  107 

'  birth.     It  is  none  of  my  saying,  it  is  an  old  rule :  chap.iii. 
'  No  man  can  serve  two   masters,  the  flesh   and  the  Year  after 

*  spirit.     The  flesh   lusteth    against   the    spirit,    crndf^^^^""' 

*  the  spirit  against  the  flesh.  These  are  contrary 
'  07ie  to  the  other,  that  ice  cannot  do  the  things  we 
'  would.  When  any  thing  in  my  book  seems 
'  severe,  regard  not  my  words,  but  the  scripture 
'  from  which  the  words  are  taken.  Christ  is  a 
'  virgin.     The  mother  of  our  virgin  Lord  is  a  vir- 

*  gin,'  &c. 

Here,  after  he  had  confessed  and  apologized  for 
himself,  he  passes  to  the  other  theme  of  commend- 
ing virginity,  and  shewing  the  inconveniences  of 
an  incumbered  and  secular  state.  Here  is  nothing 
affirmed  that  he  himself  had  either  of  the  two  sorts 
of  virginity.  And  if  any  one  Judge,  as  Baronius 
seems  to  have  done,  tliat  the  chain  of  thought  leads 
one  to  think  he  meant  so ;  that  conjecture  will  be 
much  overbalanced  by  what  he  says  plainly  and 
expressly  of  his  own  case  in  another  place  %  where 
he  speaks  of  his  ill  life,  and  aggravates  the  guilt  of 
it  as  being  the  defiling  of  his  baptism.  For  com- 
menting on  that  expression  of  Isaiah  concerning 
himself,  that  he  was  a  man  of  unclean  lips,  he 
says,  '  He  as  being  a  just  man  had  sinned  only  in 
'  word,  and  therefore  had  only  unclean  lips,  not  a 

*  foul  conscience.  But  I,  as  using  my  eyes  to  lust, 
'  and  being  oflfended  by  my  hand,  and  sinning  by 
'  my  foot,  and  all  my  limbs,  have  every  thing  un- 
'  clean.  And  because  having  been  once  baptized 
'  with  the  Spirit,  I  have  defiled  my  garments  again ; 

e  Explanatio  Visionis  Isaiae,  Epist.  142.  [Ep.  18.  sect.  ii.  eel. 
Vallars.] 


108  St.  Hierome. 

CHAP.iii. '  I  deserve   the   second   baptism,   which   is  that  of 


fire.' 

ipo- 

stles 


Year  after 

shL^^'''  ^^  ^^®  some  great  and  mortal  sin  that  he  speaks 

of,  (for  they  do  not  use  to  speak  so  of  sins  of  daily 
incursion,)  and  we  read  of  no  such  that  he  was 
guilty  of,  but  his  fornication.  His  words  also  are 
such  as  to  particularize  that. 

And  besides,  he  professes  in  a  great  many  places^, 
(in  the  foresaid  letter  to  Damasus  for  one,)  that  he 
undertook  the  monk's  life,  as  a  state  of  voluntary 
penance  for  his  sins ;  whereas  they  that  in  those 
times  were  baptized  in  their  adult  age,  would  have 
been  counted  greatly  to  undervalue  the  grace  of 
baptism,  if  they  had  thought  any  such  thing  neces- 
sary for  the  sins  they  had  committed  before.  They 
always  speak  of  baptism  as  giving  a  person  a  free, 
total,  and  absolute  discharge  from  all  guilt  of  sin, 
original  or  actual,  before  that  time. 

IV.  One  thing  that  will  stick  as  an  objection  in 
the  minds  of  those  that  are  acquainted  with  the 
ecclesiastical  discipline  of  that  age,  is  this ;  that  if 
he  had  been  baptized  in  infancy,  or  any  time  before 
his  fornication ;  that  sin  being  after  his  baptism, 
would  have  rendered  him  incapable  of  holy  orders. 
225.  Because  the  canons  of  that  time,  those  of  Nice^, 
2°4' those  of  Eliberis^',  and  those  of  Neocsesarea  *,  as 
also  Can.  Apostol.  61.  {als.  53.)  do  enact,  that  if 
any  one  after  his  baptism  did  fall  into  fornication, 
or  any  other  of  the  great  crimes ;  such  a  man, 
though  he  might  by  penance  be  restored  to  lay- 
communion,  must  never  be  ordained  to  the  holy 
functions.     And   so  strict  it  was,   that  if  such  an 

i  Epist.  61,  58,  &c.  [16.]  ^  Can.  9,  10.  ^'  Can.  30, 

»  Can   9,  10. 


St  Hierome.  109 

one  were  ordained  by  mistake,  his  crimes  not  being  chap.iii. 
known  ;  when  they  came  afterward  to  be  known,  Year  after 
he  was  to  be  deposed  by  the  Nicene  canon  :  but  the^^j^^^P^" 
Neocsesarean  admits  him  to  continue  in  the  name, 
and  some  part  of  the  office ;  but  not  to  offer,  as 
they  called  it,  i.e.  to  consecrate  the  holy  elements. 
And  this  they  will  have  to  be  observed,  '  because 
'  (as  the  words  of  the  Nicene  canon  are)  the  holy 
'  church  does  in  all  things  keep  to  that  which  is 
'  blameless,'  or,  without  scandal.  But  as  for  hea- 
thens, or  men  unbaptized,  they  judged  that  no  sin 
whatever  committed  in  that  state  was  to  be  an  im- 
pediment of  their  promotion  after  they  came  to  be 
baptized.  In  a  Avord,  they  reckoned  that  penance, 
or  a  long  course  of  repentance,  would  cure  a  mor- 
tal sin,  but  so  as  to  leave  a  scar.  But  that  baptism 
did  perfectly  wash  oflf  all  the  stain  and  discredit  of 
sins  committed  before  it.  So  that  St.  Hierome's 
being  ordained  presbyter  (as  we  said  before  he  was) 
by  Paulinus,  will  make  an  argument  that  his  baptism 
was  after  his  fornication. 

But  then  they  that  know  that  the  canons  ran 
thus,  know  also  that  the  practice  was  not  always 
so  strict  and  regular  as  the  canon  :  but  that,  on  the 
contrary,  these  and  some  other  such  strict  rules 
were  frequently  dispensed  with  in  the  case  of  such 
men  as  came  afterward  to  be  of  great  merit  or 
abilities,  which  the  church  could  not  Avell  want  : 
and  that  St.  Hierome  was,  without  controversy,  the 
most  learned  and  best  skilled  in  interpreting  the 
scripture  of  any  man  then  living ;  and  also  was  a 
great  favourite  of  pope  Damasus,  whose  interest 
was  great  in  all  the  church. 

And    besides,   an   observation   which   retorts    the 


110  St.  Hierome. 

CHAP,  1 1 1,  force  of  this  argument  strongly  to  the  other  side,  is 
Year  after  this ;  that  these  canons  had  in  great  measure  their 
sties!^''  force  upon  St.  Hierome.  For  he  not  only  protested, 
when  he  was  made  presbyter,  as  he  tells  us  him- 
self^, that  if  Paulinus  who  ordained  him,  'meant 
'  thereby  to  take  him  out  of  his  state  of  monachism, 
'  [or  penance,]  that  he  would  not  so  accept  it ;'  but 
also,  after  he  was  ordained,  refused,  out  of  a  deep 
humility  and  sense  of  his  sin,  to  execute  the  priestly 
office,  at  least  in  the  principal  parts  thereof.  Of 
which  there  are  these  proofs : 

1.  That  in  all  his  letters  and  works  one  finds  no 
mention  or  instance  of  his  acting  in  that  office.  Of 
this  I  am  no  further  confident,  than  that  having 
taken  notice  as  I  read,  I  remember  none. 

2.  That  Epiphanius  affirms  this  of  him,  and  of 
Vincentius,  another  monk  that  had  been  ordained. 
The  occasion  was  this.  Epiphanius  had,  in  a  case 
which  he  judged  to  be  of  necessity,  ordained  Pauli- 
nianus,  St.  Hierome's  younger  brother,  priest ;  though 
the  place  in  which  he  did  it  was  out  of  his  own 
diocese.  Being  blamed  for  this  encroachment  by 
John  bishop  of  Jerusalem,  he  makes  this  apology^; 
'  Though  no  man  ought  to  go  beyond  his  own 
'  measure  ;  yet  Christian  charity,  in  which  there  is 
'  no  guile,  is  to  be  preferred  before  all.  Nor  should 
'  you  consider  what  is  done  ;  but  at  what  time,  and 
'  in  what  manner,  and  for  what  reasons,  and  upon 
'  whom,  the  thing  was  done.     For  when  I  saw  that 

kEpist.  6t.  contra  errores  Joannis  Hierosol.  [This  epistle, 
or  treatise,  is  removed  from  its  place  by  Vallarsius,  and  printed 
with  others  of  similar  argument  in  tom.ii.- — See  the  passage 
quoted,  Op.  ii.  p.  452.  sect.  41.] 

'Epist,  ad  Joann.  Hierosol.  60.  [Ep.  51.  ed.  Vallars.] 


St.  Hierome.  Ill 

'  there  was  a  great  number  of  holy  brethren  in  thecHAP.iii. 
'monastery;  and  the  holy  presbyters  Hierome  and  Year  after 
'  Vincent,  by  reason  of  their  modesty  and  humiHty^|.^®j'P°" 
'  would  not  execute  the  offices  proper  for  their  title, 
'  nor  labour  in  that  part  of  the  ministry,  in  which 
'  consists  the  chief  salvation  of  Christians,'  &c. 

His  being  made  priest  after  his  sin,  is  not  so 
great  a  proof  of  his  baptism  coming  between,  as 
those  severe  censures  of  himself  are,  that  his  sin 
was  after  his  baptism.  He  that  in  that  age  should 
have  spoken  of  his  sins  committed  before  baptism, 
as  he  does  of  his  ™,  '  I  came  into  the  fields  and  wil- 
(  derness,  that  their  bewailing  diirescentia "  pec- 
'  cata,  my  sins  that  lie  so  hard  upon  me,  I  might 
'  move  the  pity  of  Christ  towards  me,'  would  have 
been  censured  to  derogate  from  that  article  of  the 
creed,  '  I  believe  one  baptism   for  the  remission  of 

*  sins.'     And  he   himself  says  in  other  places",  'all 

*  fornications  and  lewdnesses  of  the  most  scandalous 
'  nature,  impiety  against  God,  parricide  or  incest, 
'  &c.,  are  washed  away  in  this  Christian  fountain 
'  or  laver.' 

In  how  different  a  strain  does  St.  Austin  confess 
his  sins,  which,  though  much  greater  than  St. 
Hierome's,  viz.  a  continued  course  of  fornication 
with  several  harlots,  yet  because  his  baptism  came 
after  them,  he  says  thus  of  them  p  ;  '  What  praise 
'  ought  I  to  give  to  the  Lord  that  my  memory  re- 
'  counts  these  things,  and  yet  my  soul  is  in  no 
'  terror  for  them  V 

">  Epist.  6 1,  [see  above.] 

n  [Vallarsius  reads  adolescenticc.'] 

o  Epist.  ad  Oceanum  de  unius  uxoris  viro.  [^Ep.  69.] 

V  Confess,  lib.  iii.  cap.  7. 


112  St.  Hierome. 

CHAP.iii.      V,   I  gaid   he  entered  into   a   monk's  life  young 
Year  after  (when  I  was  sliewing  that  it  was  probable  he  took 
stiesT^      the  habit  at  Rome).     He  himself  says  so  in  several 
places  •'. 

The  vulgar  reader  is  not  to  imagine  that  this 
monastic  life  was  then  of  the  same  sort  with  that, 
which  is  now  for  the  most  part  in  use  in  the  church 
of  Rome.  On  the  contrary,  the  first  institution  and 
primitive  practice  of  it  was  commendable.  It  is 
time,  and  the  corruption  of  the  age,  and  supersti- 
tions added  to  it,  and  the  great  revenues  that  have 
been  settled  on  the  monasteries,  that  have  perverted 
it.  They  professed  virginity ;  and  they  did  accord- 
ingly with  wonderful  hardships  of  diet,  lodging,  &c., 
keep  under  the  body.  They  sold  all  they  had,  and 
gave  it  to  the  poor.  They  renounced  all  the  affairs 
of  secular  life,  but  at  the  same  time  used  daily 
labour  for  their  living:  they  had  not  then  the  fat 
.of  the  land  ;  nor  one  ])olitic  head,  whose  interest 
they  were  to  promote.  If  any  one  endeavoured  to 
live  at  ease,  or  indulge  himself,  he  was  not  counted 
a  monk.  St.  Hierome  speaks  of  some  few  that  he 
had  seen    of   this    sort^.     '  I    have    seen,'  says   he, 

*  some  that  after  they  have  renounced  the  world, 
'  vestimentis  duntaj^at,  in  their  garments,  or  habit 
'  only,  and  by  a  verbal  profession,  not  in  deeds ; 
'  have  altered  nothing  of  their  former  way  of  living  : 
'  they  are  richer,  rather  than  poorer,  than   before : 

*  they  have  as  much  attendance  of  servants,'  &ic. 
So  that  we  see  all  monks,  good  or  bad,  wore  the 
garments  of  a  monk. 

Yet  as  commendable  as  it  was  in  the   practice 

q  Epist.  2.  [52.]  item  62.  [82],  &c. 
•■  Epist.  4.  ad  Rusticnm.  [Ep.  \  25.] 


8t,  Hierome.  113 

then;  St.  Hierome  has  been  under  some  censure, chap.iii. 
for  his  excessive  urging  it  on  people ;  not  only  in  {~7^ 
his  own  time,  but  ever  since;  and  not  only  amono-ti^e^po- 

sties 

protestants,  but  among  those  of  the  church  of  Rome 
that  are  any  thing  impartial.  Mr.  Du  Pin,  who  is 
highly  to  be  valued  for  that  quality,  says  of  him, 
'  concerning  virginity  and  the  monk's  life,  he  often 
'  speaks  so,  as  if  he  Mould  have  one  think  they  are 
'  necessary  for  salvation ^' 

Where  shall  one  meet,  even  among  the  late  monks, 
an  expression  in  praise  of  this  sort  of  life  more  ex- 
orbitant than  one  that  he  has  in  his  letter  to  Eu- 
stochium,  a  lady  that  professed  that  state  ?  Where 
addressing  himself  to  Paulla  her  mother,  he  says, 
'  Your  daughter  has  procured  you  a  great  benefit:  you 
'  are  now  become  God's  mother-in-law,'  socriis  Dei 
esse  coepisti.  This  is  something  worse  than  calling 
the  habit,  the  garments  of  Christ.  He  means,  that 
the  daughter,  by  professing  a  religious  virginity, 
was  become  the  spouse  of  Christ ;  and  so  the  mo- 
ther must  be  his  mother-in-law.  But  such  alleoo- 
ries,  carried  too  far,  border  upon  impiety.  They 
are  not  to  be  so  easily  pardoned  to  a  man  of  a  cool 
head :  but  St.  Hierome  having  had  the  spleen  to  a 
high  degree,  must  be  allowed  some  favour  in  the 
censure  of  his  expressions.  Those  men  when  they 
are  in,  at  commending  or  disparaging  any  thing, 
are  carried  to  speak  more  than  they  mean  at  their 
sedate  times. 

VI.  But  it  was  not  during  the  times  of  Damasus, 
that  St.  Hierome  fell  under  any  censure  for  this  his 
over-lashing:    but  afterward,  in   the   times   of  Siri- 


s  Nouv.  Bibl.  torn.  iii.  p.  i. 

WALL,   VOL.  II.  I 


114  St.  Hierome. 

CHAP.iii.  cius.     Damasus  had  been  so  much  of  the  same  tem- 

Year  after  P®''''  ^^^*  ^*  ^^  Hkelj  he  approved  of  him  the  better 

the  apo-     for  it ;  aiid  that  one  reason  of  his  using  those  high- 

285.  flown   expressions    was,    to   ingratiate   himself  with 

him.     And  we  find  him,  in  his  writings,  during  this 

later  popedom,  frequently  appealing  to  the  times  of 

Damasus.     '  I  wrote,'  says  he,  '  while   Damasus  of 

«  blessed   memory  lived,  a  book  against  Helvidius, 

'  of  the  perpetual  virginity  of  the  blessed  Mary :  in 

'  which  I  had  occasion,  for  the  setting  forth  the  ad- 

•  vantage   of  virginity,    to  say  many  things   of  the 

•  inconveniences  of  marriage.     Did    that   excellent 

*  man,  and    learned   in    the   scriptures,    that    virgin 

♦  doctor  of  the  church  which  is  a  virgin,  find  any 
'  fault  with  that  discourse  ?  And  in  my  book  to 
'  Eustochium,   I   said  some  things  harder  yet  con- 

♦  cerning  marriage ;    and  yet  nobody  was   offended 

•  at  it.  For  Damasus,  being  a  lover  of  chastity, 
'  heard  my  commendations  of  virginity  with  a  greedy 

*  ear*.' 

This  last  is  the  book  which  he  complains  is  now 
lapidatus,  "  stoned  ;"  or  generally  condemned. 

He  says  also  in  another  place",  'that  Damasus 

*  did  himself  write  in  commendation  of  virginity, 
'  both  in  prose  and  verse.' 

It  is  the  less  wonder,  that  in  letters  between 
these  two,  that  did  so  magnify  this  state  of  life,  the 
habit,  or  garment,  by  which  the  continent  life  of 
a  monk  was  professed,  should  be  called  the  garment 
of  Christ. 

And   if  what  I   have  produced,  be   suflficient    to 

'  Apolog.  pro  libro  contra  Jovinianum.  [Epist.  50.  (Vallars. 
48,)  sect.  17.] 

"  Epist.  2.  ad  Nepotian.  [Ep.  52.] 


St.  Austin.  115 

make  this   probable,  then   I  have   cleared  St.  Hie-CHAP.iii. 
rome's  parents  of  an  imputation  that  has  been  laid  year  after 
on  them  ever  since  Erasmus'  time,  even  by  learned  ^^\^  ^p*'" 

•'  sties. 

men :  and  which  St.  Hierome  himself  would  have 
counted  a  heinous  one.     For  when  he  declares  '  how 

*  sinful  it  would  be,  if  any  parents  that  are  Chris- 

*  tians  should  suffer  their  children  to  die  unbap- 
'  tized ;'  (as  I  have  shewn  he  does^ ;)  he  must  judge 
that  his  parents  had  run  a  very  sinful  hazard,  if 
they  had  let  him  continue  so  long,  and  then  take  so 
long  a  journey,  before  they  had  procured  him  bap- 
tism. And  then  also  the  picture  which  they  have 
lately  made  in  the  chapel  dedicated  to  this  saint,  in 
the  church  of  the  Invalids  in  France,  representing 
his  baptism  at  adult  age,  will  prove  a  mistake. 

Sect.  11.  Of  St.  Austin. 

His  father  was  a  heathen,  when  this  his  son  was 
born  :  and  a  long  time  after. 

I.  There  is  no  instance  of  this  nature  more  com- 
monly urged,  than  that  of  St.  Austin  :  and  yet  none 
that  is  a  more  palpable  mistake. 

That  he  was  about  thirty-three  years  old  when  288. 
he  was  baptized,  is  clear :  he  himself  gives  a  large 
account  of  it  in  his  book  of  Confessions y.  As  he 
observed  ^  that  that  book  w^as  in  his  lifetime  more 
generally  read  than  any  other  of  his  works  ;  so  it 
has  happened  ever  since.  That,  of  all  other,  having 
had  the  fortune  to  be  translated  into  many  vulgar 
languages,  every  body  has  observed  the  story  of  his 
baptism :  and  it  has  cast  scruples  into  the  heads  of 
many  unlearned  readers,  to  think,  if  infant-baptism 
were  then  practised,  why  he  was  not  baptized  in 
infancy. 

'^  Part  i.  ch.  I5.§.  I.         yLib.ix.c.6.         ''  Retractat.  lib.  ii.  c.  6. 

I  2 


116  .     St.  Austin. 

CHAi'.iii,  II.  As  for  his  parents:  Possidius,  who  a  little 
Year  after  after  his  death  wrote  his  life,  says  in  the  beginning 
stiej"^""  thereof;  that  he  was  'born  of  creditable  and  Chris- 
'  tian  parents.'  So  here  matters  are  brought  to  a 
fair  issue.  St.  Austin,  in  his  books  which  I  quoted  ^ 
makes  us  to  understand,  that  he  never  knew,  heard, 
or  read,  of  any  Christian  that  was  an  antipsedo- 
baptist ;  and  Pelagius  his  adversary,  in  the  question 
of  original  sin,  whose  interest  it  was  to  have  found 
some  if  there  had  been  any,  confesses,  that  he  knew 
of  none.  And  yet  now  it  seems  St.  Austin's  own 
father  was  one. 

And  this  must  have  passed  for  current ;  if  St. 
Austin  himself  had  not  given  us  a  truer,  or  at  least 
a  more  particular  account  of  his  parents  than  Possi- 
dius has  done.  But  this  he  does  in  the  foremen- 
tioned  book  of  his  Confessions.  Only  there  is  this 
difference ;  that  the  story  of  his  baptism  being  set 
down  at  large,  is  taken  notice  of  by  every  body  : 
but  his  father's  want  of  Christianity  being  mentioned 
but  briefly,  and  by  the  by  in  one  or  two  places,  has 
escaped  the  notice  of  many  readers. 

Marshall,  in  his  Defence  of  Infant  Baptism ^  or 
rather  a  friend  of  his,  whom  he  made  use  of  to 
search  into  matters  of  antiquity ;  '  having  himself,' 
as  he  there  says,  *  but  just  leisure  enough  to  look 
'  into  these  authors  now  and  then  f  he  was  taken 
up,  I  suppose,  with  much  higher  authors;  Calvin, 
Twisk,  &c.  But  his  friend  has  cleared  this  matter 
very  well :  which  was  easy  to  do.  He  has  produced 
the  particular  places,  where  St.  Austin  tells  us,  that 
his  father  was  no  baptized  Christian,  nor  so  much 

a  Part  i.  ch.  19.  §.  17  and  30.  '^  Pag.  59.  [edit.  4to.  1646.] 


t,  Austin.  117 

as  a  catechumen,  nor  did   believe  in  Christ,   till  acHAP.iii. 
good  while  after  he  [St.  Austin]  was  born.     Which  ^^^^f 
are  these  :  the  apo- 

.  .  sties. 

In  the  first  book  of  his  Confessions,  ch.  xi.  speak- 
ing of  the  time  when  he  was  a  child,  (about  eight  263. 
or  nine  years  old,  one  must  guess  by  the  story,)  he 
says    of    his   father ;  Hie   nondum    crediderat :  '  he 
'  did  not  yet  at  that  time  believe.' 

In  the  second  book,  ch.  iii.  speaking  to  God  of 
the  state  of  his  father  and  mother,  at  that  time 
when  he  was,  as  himself  mentions,  sixteen  years  270. 
old,  he  says,  '  In  my  mother's  breast  thou  hadst  al- 
'  ready  begun  thy  temple,  and  made  an  entrance  for 
'  thy  dwelling-place.  But  he  [my  father]  was  yet 
'  but  a  catechumen,  and  that  but  newly.' 

In  the  ninth  book,  chap.  ix.  reckoning  up  in  a 
speech  to  God  Almighty  the  good  deeds  of  his  mo- 
ther, who  was  then  lately  dead :  he  *^aj-S--^-?TiraiJV  "28 
'she  also  gained  oy-  lO^-thSheV  husband  in  the 
'  latter  Gild  of  his  life.  And  had  no  more  occasion  276. 
'  to  bewail  that  [crossness  and  ill  nature]  in  him 
*  after  he  was  Jidelis,  a  baptized  Christian ;  which 
'  she  had  endured  in  him  before  he  was  so.' 

Yet  notwithstanding  all  this,  the  life-writers  copy- 
ing out  of  Possidius,  and  one  out  of  another,  do  to 
this  day  write   him  parente  ufvoqm  Christiano  na- 
tum,  '  born  of  parents  both  Christians.'     If  he,  or 
they,  mean  that  his  parents  were  both  Christians  at 
the  time  of  his  birth,  it  is  a  plain  mistake.     But  if 
they  mean  that  they  became  so  before  they  died  ;  it 
is  true,  but  ought   to  have  been  explained   so  :  at 
least  by  the  modern  writers,  because  of  the  occasion 
of  mistake  that  it  lays  in  the  way  of  the  antip^do- 
baptists,  of  which  there  was  formerlv  no  fear. 


118  St.  Austin. 

CHAP, 111.  His  mother  indeed  was  a  Christian  (in  heart  and 
Year  after  belief  at  Icast '.  whether  baptized  or  not,  we  are  not 
sties'^""  certain)  at  the  time  of  his  birth.  But  what  could  a 
254.  woman  do  against  the  will  of  such  an  imperious 
and  choleric  husband,  as  St.  Austin  in  many  places  ^ 
declares  his  father  to  have  been  in  those  times? 
8he  did  what  she  could  or  dared :  he  says  of  him- 
self'^, '  I  was  signed  Mdth  the  sign  of  Christ's  cross, 
*  and  was  seasoned  with  his  salt,'  (ceremonies  then 
used  by  Christians  on  their  children,)  '  even  from 
'  the  womb  of  my  mother,  who  greatly  trusted  in 
'  thee.'  But  so  solemn  a  thing  as  baptism  she  could 
not,  or  dared  not,  it  seems,  procure  to  be  admin- 
istered against  her  husband's  will.  For  it  was  not 
a  things  then  used  to  be  huddled  up  in  a  private 
parlour,  or  in  a  woman's  bedchamber,  or  without 
godfathers,  &c.,  but  had  many  solemn  circumstances, 
""^1   was  performed   by  putting  the  child   into   the 

,        ?  oonffregation,  &c.,  except 
water  m  presence  ot  uie  ^^^^^uS',       /        '     ^ 

in  some  particular  cases  of  extreme  imJ'te  and  ne- 
cessity. 

It  was  contrary  to  her  husband's  inclination,  that 
she  taught  her  child,  as  she  nursed  him,  the  prin- 
ciples of  the  Christian  religion.  As  he  plainly  inti- 
mates when  he  says,  '  So  I  then  believed,  and  so 
'  did  all  our  family,  except  my  father  only;  who  did 

*  not  however  so  far  overrule  the  power  of  my  mo- 
'  ther's  godly  love  toward  me,  but  that  I  believed 

♦  in  Christ,  though  he  did  not^' 

St.  Paul  persuades  a  believing  wife  to  stay  with 
an  unbelieving  husband  &,  partly  for  the  hope  there 

c  Confess,  lib.  ix.  c.  9.  ^'c.  ^  Ibid.  lib.  i.  c.  1 1 . 

e  See  parti,  ch.  .5.  ^ect.  7-  §•  3-  '  Confess,  bb.  1.  c.  .1. 

g    I  Cor.  vii. 


St.  Austin.  119 

is  of  gaining   [or  converting]  him  :  and  partly,  be-  chap.iii. 
cause  the  unbelieving  party  is  seldom  so  obstinate  Year  after 
or  averse  to  Christianity,  but  that  the  children  are^^j^^^P"' 
allowed    to    be    made    holy    [or    baptized]    into    it. 
Which  I  shewed  ^  to  be  the  sense  which  the  most 
ancient   writers  give   to   his   words.     But   still   this 
must  be  understood  to  hold  for  the  most  part,  not 
always.     There   has*  been   seldom  known   any  hus- 
band that  would    yield  so  little  to   the   desires   or 
petitions  of  a  wife  as  this  man  would,  while  he  was 
a  heathen.     He  used  her  not  as  a  companion,  but 
as  an  absolute  servant ;  even  by  the  account  which 
the  son  gives  of  the  father  after  his  death. 

In  a  word,  St.  Austin's  case  was  the  same  with 
that  of  Timothy,  whose  mother  was  a  Jewess  ;  and 
yet  his  father  being  a  Greek,  i.  e.  a  heathen,  and 
probably  a  hater  of  the  Jewish  religion,  as  St. 
Austin's  father  was  of  the  Christian,  he  had  not 
been  circumcised  :  as  appears.  Acts  xvi.  1,  3.  Ilim 
Paul  took  and  circumcised  him,  because  of  the 
Jews  that  were  in  those  quarters :  for  they  hnew 
all  that  his  father  was  a  Greek:  and  therefore 
probably  would  be  inquisitive  whether  he  had  been 
circumcised  or  not. 

Indeed  when  St.  Austin  was  a  child  not  yet  big 
enough  to  go  to  school,  but  capable  to  express  his 
mind,  and  it  happened  that  he  fell  ill  of  a  sudden 
pain  in  his  stomach,  so  violent  that  he  was  like  to 
die :  and  he  had,  as  he  tells  himself',  '  the  motion 
'  of  mind,  and  the  faith  to  beg  earnestly  of  his 
'  mother  to  get  him  baptized :'  she  in  that  case 
would  have  ventured  to  do  it,  and  did  in  great  haste 

h   Part  i.  ch.  19.  §.  19.  item  ch.  1 1.  §.  i  i. 
'  Lib.  i.  cap.  1 1 . 


120  St.  Austin: 

CHAP. II I.  bestir  herself  in  providing  for  it.  And  it  had  been 
Year  after  dono,  if  he  had  not  quickly  mended  of  his  pain. 
Ities^^"  But  there  are  several  things  considerable  in  this 
case.  1.  It  was  a  case  of  great  extremity:  it  must 
be  done  now  or  never.  2.  It  was  at  his  own  desire, 
so  that  his  father  could  not  blame  his  mother.  3.  In 
that  case  a  private  and  clinical  baptism  was  suffi- 
cient. 4.  It  is  probable  that  his  father  was  now 
mollified  in  that  averseness  that  he  had  for  the 
Christian  religion,  in  which  he  himself,  in  a  few 
years  after,  thought  fit  to  become  a  catechumen,  or 
hearer. 

III.  Afterward  the  scene  altered  in  the  family  of 
27i-Patritius,  St.  Austin's  father.  For  when  he  began 
to  believe  in  Christ,  and  to  fear  God ;  his  son  Austin 
began  to  be  estranged  from  religion,  and  all  good 
inclinations,  by  the  heat  of  lust  and  fornication  J. 
And  when  his  father  now  joined  with  his  mother 
in  persuading  him  to  associate  himself  with  the 
Christians,  and  of  all  the  sorts  of  them  to  join  with 
the  catholic  church ;  this  advice  had  no  effect  upon 
273.  him  at  that  time.  For  he  quickly  after  ran  into 
the  blasphemous  sect  of  the  Manichees^,  who  de- 
rided all  baptism  and  the  scriptures,  and  were  no 
more  Christians  than  the  Mahometans  are  now. 

Yet  it  had  its  effect  afterward.  For  twelve  or 
thirteen  years  after,  when  his  father  had  now  been 
dead  a  good  while,  and  he  disliking  the  Manichees, 
turned  a  sceptic,  or  seeker,  or  (as  they  now  call 
them)  a  deist,  not  knowing  what  religion  to  be  of; 
he  remembered  the  advice  of  his  parents,  which  he 
had  formerly  despised :  and  '  I  resolved,'  says  he, 
'  to  be  a  catechumen  in  the  catholic  church,  which 

J  Lib.  ii.  cap.  i,  2,  &c.  ^   Lib.  iii.  cap.  6. 


Monica,  Adeodatus,  ^c.  121 

Miad  been  recommended  to  me  by  my  parents,  sochap.iii. 
*  long  till  some  certainty  should  shew  itself  to  my  Year  after 
'  mind  which  way  I  were  best  to  take^'     And  this  *^  ^p°" 

,  •'  ^  sties. 

proved  an  occasion  of  his  final  conversion.  287. 

I  the  rather  recite  these  words  here,  their  mean- 
ing being  explained  by  the  circumstances :  because 
taken  by  themselves  they  might  strengthen  that 
opinion,  (which  has  been  proved  a  mistake,)  that 
his  father  was  a  Christian  when  this  his  son  was 
born. 

Sect.  12.  Of  Monica,  Adeodatus,  Alypius,  and 
some  others. 

They  do  none  of  them  make  instances  for  this 
purpose. 

I.  Some  ( I  think  one  or  two )  have  named 
Monica,  St.  Austin's  mother,  among  their  instances ; 
but  without  any  kind  of  ground  :  since  there  is  no 
Ijnowing  whether  she  were  born  of  Christian  pa- 
rents, and  baptized  in  infancy ;  or  of  heathens,  and 
baptized  at  years  of  discretion.  She  had  never  been 
known  if  she  had  not  been  mother  to  St.  Austin. 
Nobody  mentions  her,  but  he :  and  he  says  nothing, 
that  I  remember,  of  the  state  of  her  parents  ;  but 
a  great  deal  of  her  goodness  and  her  care  of  him. 

II.  Adeodatus,  St.  Austin's  son,  begotten  in  for- 
nication, who  being  fifteen  years  old"",  was  baptized 
together  with  him,  is  likewise  mentioned  without 
any  reason.  St.  Austin  was  a  Manichee  when  this 
son  was  born  to  him  :  and  they  condemned  all  273. 
Christian  baptism  of  infants  or  others,  as  I  shall 
shew  by  and  by",  concerning  them  and  some  other 

1  Lib.  V.  c.  ult.  item  lib.  vi.  c.  1 1.  m  Confess,  lib.  ix.  c.  6. 

n   Chap.  5.  §.3. 


122  Monica,  Adeodatus, 

CHAP. I II.  sects.  It  were  absurd  to  expect,  that  he  should 
Year  after  have  procurcd  him  to  be  baptized  before  he  himself 
sties!'"'"  ^^^  renounced  that  opinion,  and  thought  fit  to  be 
baptized  himself.  He  says  of  him";  'We  [I  and 
'  Alypius]  joined  him  with  us  of  the  same  age  of 
'  ourselves  in  thy  grace,  [the  grace  of  baptism,]  to 
'  be  educated  in  thy  discipline,  and  were  baptized,' 
&c.  As  Ishmael  was  circumcised,  so  this  youth 
was  baj)tized,  the  same  day  with  his  father:  which 
was  at  Easter,  anno  388. 
288.  III.  When  I  have  spoken  of  Alypius,  whom 
St.  Austin  mentions  as  baptized  together  with  him ; 
I  hope  I  have  done.  It  is  only  in  compliance  to 
Mr.  Tombes,  that  he  need  be  mentioned  at  all. 
He  had  observed  that  he  was  baptized  when  he 
was  adult,  and  so  makes  him  an  instance  for  this 
purpose  P,  without  giving  any  proof  or  pretence  of 
it,  that  his  parents  were  Christians.  He  might  in  a 
week's  time  have  collected  a  hundred  such  instances 
of  persons  baptized  at  man's  age,  whose  parents  are 
utterly  unknown,  as  Alypius'  are  :  only  people  have 
generally  concluded  that  they  were  heathens,  because 
they  did  not  baptize  their  children. 

And  there  happen  to  be  also  some  more  parti- 
cular proofs  in  his  case.  As  that,  before  his  con- 
version, he  abhorred  or  scorned  the  name  of  Christ : 
as  St.  Austin  gives  us  to  understand,  when  after 
having  given  God  thanks  for  his  grace  in  recovering 
him  himself,  he  adds ;  '  Thou  didst  also  subdue 
'  Alypius  the  brother  of  my  soul,  to  the  name  of 

o  Confess,  lib.  ix.  cap.  6. 

P  Exercitation  [about  Infant-baptism,  4to.  1646.  p.  28.  also 
an  Examen  of  Marshall's  sermon,  4to.  1645.]  V'^^- 


Alypias^  Thecla,  Sj-c.  123 

'  thy   only-begotten,   our    Lord    and    Saviour  Jesus  chap.  iii. 
'  Christ,  which  he  before   took   in   disdain  to  have  year  after 
'  inserted  in  our  letters^.'  theapo- 

sties. 

And  also  that  he  was  so  ignorant  of  what  the 
Christians  believed  or  held  concerning  the  person 
of  Jesus  Christ.  For  having  heard  some  Christians 
maintain  that  he  as  man  had  no  soul,  but  that  his 
divinity  was  in  the  stead  of  a  soul  to  his  body ; 
and  thinking  this  to  be  the  common  opinion  of  the 
Christians,  and  judging  it  to  be  absurd ;  '  he  was,' 
as  St.  Austin  says'",  '  the  more  hardly  brought  over 
'  to  the  Christian  religion.  But  afterwards  under- 
'  standing  this  to  be  the  mistake  of  the  Apolli- 
'  narian  heretics,  he  congratulated  the  Catholic 
*  faith,'  &c.  So  improbable  is  it  that  he  had  Chris- 
tian parents. 

IV.  There  is  one  Den^  an  antipsedobaptist  writer, 
and  Dan  vers  from  him*,  that  mentions  a  great  many 
more  names  yet,  viz.  Pancratius,  Pontius,  Nazarius, 
Thecla,  Luigerus,  Erasma  Tusca,  the  three  sons  of 
Leonilla.  But  they  do  but  just  mention  them:  and 
if  the  reader  would  know  who  they  are,  and  upon 
what  grounds  they  are  brought  in  here;  he  must 
look  to  that  himself. 

For  Thecla :  if  they  mean  the  famous  Thecla  that 
is  said  to  be  baptized  by  St.  Paul,  there  is  no  doubt 
that  she  was  baptized  in  her  adult  age:  but  there 
is  as  much  probability  of  St.  Paul's  parents  having 
been  Christians,  as  of  hers.     For  the  rest,  nobody 

^  Confess,  lib.  ix.  cap.  4.  i"  Ibid.  lib.  vii.  c.  19. 

s  [A  treatise  of  Baptism  ;  wherein  that  of  Believers  and  that 
of  Infants  is  examined  by  the  Scriptures  ;  with  the  history  of 
both  out  of  Antiquity,  &c.,  by  John  Denne] 

'  Treatise  of  Baptism,  part  i.  c.  7.  [Cent.  iv.  p.  63.] 


124  Monica,  Adeodatus, 

CHAP. II I.  knows  whom  they  mean  :  for  as  some  of  those 
Year  after  nanios  havo  had  several  persons  called  by  them,  so 
the  apo-     some  havc  had  none  at  all  that  I  know  of. 

sties. 

What  I  have  to  add  in  this  second  edition  to 
this  and  the  foregoing  chapter  is,  that  whereas  one 
Mr.Delaune"  an  antipeedobaptist,  in  a  '  Plea  for  Non- 
'  conformists,'  written  in  king  Charles  IT.'s  time,  had 
heaped  together  a  great  number  of  quotations  out 
of  modern  authors,  who  had  reported  the  ancient 
opinions  or  usages  to  be,  in  any  respect  whatsoever, 
different  from  the  tenets  or  usages  of  the  church  of 
England  ;  and  among  the  rest  had  brought  in  at 
p.  11.  all  that  he  could  rake  together  against  infant- 
baptism,  (taking  them,  I  suppose,  out  of  Danvers,) 
viz.  the  sayings  of  bishop  Taylor,  Grotius,  Lud. 
Vives,  Daille,  Dr.  Field,  Mr.  Baxter,  Walafrid 
Strabo,  Boemus ;  which  among  several  others  I  re- 
cited in  the  last  chapter:  and  whereas  there  were 
none  of  these  quotations  about  infant-baptism,  or 
the  other  subjects,  but  had  been  considered  and 
answered  by  learned  men  of  the  church,  (though 
not  in  any  particular  answer  to  Delaune's  pamphlet, 
but  on  other  occasions,)  and  consequently,  unless 
the  nonconformists  could  produce  some  new  matter, 
there  seemed  to  have  been  said  all  that  was  necessary 
to  restore  peace  and  union  :  now  the  other  day,  a 
certain  busy  writer,  for  dissension,  instead  of  offering 
any  new  thing,  reprinted  Delaune's*^  book,  with  a 

^  [De  Laune's  Plea  for  the  Nonconformists ;  shewing  the 
true  state  of  their  case,  &c.,  in  a  letter  to  Dr.  B.  Calarny,  upon 
his  sermon  called  '  Scrupulous  Conscience  :'  to  which  is  added 
a  parallel  scheme  of  the  Pagan,  Papal,  and  Christian  rites  and 
ceremonies.  With  a  narrative  of  the  remarkable  tryal  and 
sufferings  underwent  for  writing,  printing,  and  publishing  here- 


sties. 


Alypius,  Thecla,  <S^c.  125 

pompous  preface,  as  a  piece  tliat  never  was  an-cHAPiir 
swered,  'a  finished  piece,' &c.,  which  called  for  an^^^;:;^ 
{inswer  from  the  churchmen.  thripo-^"^ 

As  for  infant-baptism  ;  there  is  not  one  word  or' 
quotation  in  it,  but  what  had  been  fully  answered  : 
nor,  as  I  think,  on  any  other  subject.  Now  at  this 
rate,  we  must  never  be  at  quiet ;  if  after  objections 
fully  proposed,  and  all  of  them  publicly  answered, 
the  method  be,  instead  of  a  fair  reply,  to  reprint  in 
a  challenging  way  the  very  same  objections  again. 

The  reason  I  have  to  think  that  he  took  all 
the  quotations  he  has  against  infant-baptism,  out 
of  Danvers,  is,  because  where  Danvers  has  mixed 
any  forgery  of  his  own  with  the  quotation,  there 
Delaune  has  done  the  like.  As  they  do  both  quote 
Grotius  in  Matt.  xix.  14.  in  the  same  words,  but 
forged  ones  :  where  they  make  him  say,  '  Infant- 
'  baptism  for  many  hundred  years  was  not  ordinary 
'  in  the  Greek  church  ;'  and  where  they  make  him 
speak  of  Constantine  as  an  instance  against  infant- 
baptism  ;  which  he  was  never  ignorant  enough 
to  do.  "" 

of;  by  Thomas  Delaune,  who  died  in  Newgate  during  his  im- 
prisonment for  this  book.  Printed  twenty  years  ago  ;  but  being 
seized  by  the  messenger  of  the  press,  was  afterwards  burnt  by 
the  common  hangman  :  and  is  now  reprinted  from  the  author's 
original  copy;  and  published  by  a  protestant  dissenter,  who  was 
the  author's  fellow-prisoner  at  the  time  of  his  death,  for  the 
cause  of  Non-conformity.— 4to.  London.  1704.  p.  66.  There 
appears  to  be  a  second  reprint,  i  imo.  1712.] 


126  The  British  Church 

CHAP.  IV. 

Of  the  Church  of  the  ancient  Britons.  And  of  some 
ancient  Sects,  viz.  the  Kovatians  and  the  Donatists ; 
which  are  hy  some  thought  to  have  been  Antipa-dobap- 
tists.     And  of  the  Arians. 

CHAP. IV.  ^.  I.  ABOUT  twenty-six  years  ago,  a  certain  an- 
Year  after  tipsedobaptist "  Writer  lighted  upon  an  argument  to 
stie^^*^  prove,  as  he  thought,  the  ancient  Christians  in  Bri- 
tain, before  the  coming  in  of  the  English,  to  have 
been  against  infant-baptism.  It  is  an  evidence  how 
great  mistakes  may  arise  from  the  misprinting  of 
two  or  three  words  in  a  book  ;  and  that,  in  a  book  of 
so  little  regard  as  Fabian's  Chronicle.  The  account 
of  the  matter  is  this  : 
631.  Venerable  Bede  wrote,  in  the  year  731,  the 
'  Church  History  of  the  English  nation :'  and  tells 
500.  how  Austin  the  JNIonk,  after  having  made  some 
progress  in  planting  Christianity  among  the  Eng- 
lish, made  a  proposal  to  the  Britons,  desiring  them 
to  join  in  communion  with  him  and  his  new  con- 
verts, and  to  assist  in  converting  the  English  to  the 
Christian  faith.  But  whereas  the  Britons  held  and 
practised  rites  and  traditions,  in  many  things  dif- 
ferent from  those  that  he  then  brought  from  the 
church  of  Rome,  he  insisted  that  they  should  leave 
off  their  own,  and  comply  with  his  ceremonies  and 
customs.  This  they  refused.  And,  after  many 
alterations,  he  at  last  made  them  this  final  proposal ; 
'  You  practise  in  many  things  contrary  to  our  cus- 
*  torn,  and  indeed  contrary  to  the  custom  of  the  uni- 
'  versal  church.  And  yet  if  you  will  comply  with 
'  me  in  these  three  things ;  that  you  keep  Easter  at 

"  Danvers,  Treatise  of  Baptism,  part  ii.  ch.  7. 


The  British  Church.  127 

*  the  right  time :  that  you  perform  the  office  of  bap-OHAP.iv. 

*  tizing   (by  which   we  are  regenerated   unto    God)  Year  after 

*  according  to  the  custom  of  the  holy  Roman  church  *¥  ^^"^ 
'  and  the  apostolic  church  ;  and  that  you  together 

*  with  us  do   preach   the   word    of  the  Lord  to  the 

*  nation  of  the  English  :  we  will  bear  patiently,  with 

*  all  the  other  things  which   you  practise   contrary 

*  to  our   customs.     But  they    answered,    that    they 

*  would  do  none   of  these   things,  nor  own  him  for 

*  their  archbishop  J','  &c. 

This  same  passage  is  related  by  several  others  of 
our  English  historians  in  the  after-ages,  who  taking 
it  from  Bede  relate  it  to  the  same  sense. 

And  among  the  rest,  one  Fabian  ^  (a  sheriff  or 
alderman  of  London  in  king  Henry  the  Seventh's 
time,  as  I  take  it)  wrote  a  Chronicle  of  the  Enslish 
history,  in  English.  There  are  two  editions  of  his  '4oo. 
book,  which  I  have  seen  in  the  Oxford  library. 
There  may  be  more :  in  one  of  them  (which  is  the 
first,  I  know  not :  I  think  the  titlepage  in  one  was 
torn)  his  words  are  to  the  same  sense  as  Bede's, 
being  these  ;  at  fol.  5Q.  b.     '  Then  he  sayde  to  them, 

*  Sen  ye  woll  not  assent  to  my  hestes  generally,  as- 

*  sent  ye  to  me  specially  in  thre  thynges  :  the  firste 

*  is,  that  ye  kepe  Esterday  in  due  fourme  and  tyme 

*  as    it    is    ordevgned.     The    seconde    that    ve  give 

y  Bedae  Eccl.  Hist.  lib.  ii.  c.  2. 

^  [The  editions  of  Fabian's  Chronicle  are  as  follows  : 

1.  Printed  by  Pynson,  in  131 6.  fol. 

2.   by  W.Rastell,  in  1533.  fol. 

3.   by  W.  Bonham,  in  1542.  fol. 

4.   by  J.  Kyngston,  in  1559.  fol. 

The  passage  quoted  is  found  at  part  i.  ch.  119.  It  is  read  in 
full,  as  given  by  Wall,  in  the  first  and  second  editions  :  in  the 
fourth  it  is  curtailed.     The  third  I  have  not  met  with.] 


128  The  British  Church. 

CHAP.iv. '  Cristendome  to  the  chiklreij  in  the  manner   that  is 


Year  after  '  used  in  the  chyrche  of  Rome.  And  the  thyrde, 
Ses!''°"  '  ^^^^^  y®  preche  unto  the  Anglis  the  worde  of 
*  God,'  &c. 

But  in  the  other,  these  words  '  in  the  manner  that 
'  is  used  in  the  chyrche  of  Rome'  are  omitted  :  so 
that  the  condition  stands  thus,  '  that  ye  give  Chris- 
'  tendom  to  the  children.'  And  this  last  mentioned 
edition  our  author  having  lighted  on,  concluded  that 
the  British  church  before  these  times  had  not  been 
used  to  give  Christendom  to,  or  baptize  children. 

But  he  should  have  considered,  that  the  account 
of  such  a  thing  should  be  taken  from  Bede  and  the 
other  ancient  historians ;  and  not  from  Fabian  : 
especially  since  Fabian  in  his  preface  acknowledges, 
(as  Mr.  Wills  says  *,  for  I  did  not  read  that,)  that 
what  he  relates  of  the  ancient  affairs,  he  has  from 
Bede :  and  consequently  his  meaning  must  be  to 
express  Bede's  sense :  and  so  that  edition  first  men- 
tioned must  be  as  he  meant  it,  and  the  omission  in 
the  other  must  have  been  by  mistake,  of  himself,  or 
the  printer. 

Fox^,  and  other  authors  that  have  wrote  since 
Fabian,  recite  the  matter  as  Bede  does. 

This  argument  taken  from  Fabian  is  endeavoured 
to  be  confirmed  by  some  other  collateral  ones :  of 
which  none  is  worth  the  mentioning,  but  that  from 
Constantine's  being  born  among  the  Britons,  and 
yet  not  baptized  in  infancy.     And  that  is  not  worth 

"  Infant- Baptism  asserted,  p.  124.  [As  Wills'  book  has  the 
paging  misplaced  in  a  singular  manner  ;  the  numbers  running 
thus,  I — 96;  I — 40;  97 — 288:  89 — 96;  37 — 159;  observe 
that  the  passage  referred  to  occurs  on  signature  I  i  i  2.] 

^  Martyrology,  at  the  year  600. 


Novatians  and  Donatists.  1 29 

it  neither;  considering  that  very  few  nowadays  be-cHAP.iv 

lieve  that  he  was  born  in  Britain,  and  none  at  all  Z 7~ 

but  this  author,  and  one  more,  that  his  father  was  a^^^^^P^- 
Christian'^. 

Pelagius  was  certainly  born  in  Britain.  And 
since  he  owns,  (as  I  have  produced  his  words ^) 
that  he  '  never  heard  of  any  Christian,  catholic,  or 

*  sectary,  that  denied  infant-baptism ;'  it  is  certain 
his  own  countrymen  did  not. 

The  man  brings  this  for  one  of  his  arguments  to 
prove  that  the  British  church  must  have  opposed 
the  baptizing  of  infants ;  '  because  they  so  fully 
'  prized  and  faithfully  adhered  to  the  scriptures,  in 

*  the   worship   of  God,   and   rejected   human    tradi- 

*  tions^,  especially  all  Romish  innovations.' &c.  If 
this  be  any  argument,  then  for  certain  the  pado- 
baptists'  cause  is  in  a  bad  case. 

II.  The  Novatians  and  Donatists  are  also  brought 
in  by  the   same  writer,  as  adversaries  of  pgedobap- 
tism.     Though  both  these  parties  of  men  were  schis- 
matics, and  forsook  the  communion  of  the  establish- 
ed  churches  in   those    times:  yet   their   differences 
having  been  rather  in   points  of  discipline  than  of 
faith,  and   they  having  been  at  some  times  of  the 
church  very  numerous,  and  the  time  of  their  flourish- 
ing  within    our   limited   period    of   400    years;    an 
argument    from    their    practice    of  keeping   infants 
unbaptized  would  be  considerable.     But  it  would  be 
withal  a  very  strange  discovery :  since  there  are  so 
many  books   extant,   written  at  the  same  time  by 
Cyprian,  Eusebius,  Optatus,  Austin,  &c.,  containing 
a  ventilation  of  all  the  dis])utes  between  the  catholics 

c  See  chap.  iii.  sect.  2.  §.  2.  d  Part  i.  chap.  .9.  §.  30. 

e  [Danvers'  Treatise,  part  ii.  chap.  7.  p.  228.] 
Wall,  vol.  ii.  k 


130  Novatians  and  Donatists. 

CHAP.iv.  and  these  men,  in  which  nothing  has  ever  been  ob- 
Year  after  scrved  that  should  intimate  that  they  had  any  such 
sties!^""  practice  or  opinion.  For  among  all  the  reasons  that 
the  Donatists  (who  rebaptized  such  as  having  been 
baptized  by  the  catholics  came  afterward  over  to 
them)  gave,  why  the  baptism  of  the  catholics  was 
null,  there  is  none  that  lays  any  blaine  on  their 
giving  it  in  infancy.  But,  on  the  contrary,  St.  Aus- 
tin does  often  make  use  of  the  instance  of  infant- 
baptism,  as  granted  by  tliem,  to  overthrow  some 
other  errors  that  they  had  about  baptism. 

It  would,  I  say,  be  a  strange  discovery  to  make 
now.  But  the  proofs  brought  for  it  do  fail  one's 
expectation.  For  as  for  those  out  of  St.  Austin 
against  the  Donatists,  Osiander,  Fuller,  Bullinger, 
&c.,  they  are  all  by  Mr.  Baxter  f  and  Mr.  Wills  s 
shewn  plainly  to  be  nothing  to  the  purpose.  And 
what  he  would  prove  out  of  Austin  de  Anitna  and 
Thomas  Waldensis,  that  the  dispute  between  Vin- 
centius  Victor  and  St.  Austin  was,  whether  infants 
ought  to  be  baptized,  will  appear  a  great  mistake, 
by  reading  what  I  have  produced  of  the  opinion  of 
Vincentius  in  this  collection^.  For  it  was  only 
whether  infants  that  happened  to  die  unbaptized, 
might  ever  enter  into  the  kingdom  of  heaven. 

Yet  he  quotes  some  writers,  that  do  indeed  say 
the  thing  that  he  would  prove.  But  they  are  only 
Sebastian  Franks  and  one  Twisk'^.     It  is  an  artifice 

f  More  Proofs  of  Infant-Baptism,  part  ii  §.  2.  chap,  4.  [p. 
240,  &c.] 

S  Infant-Baptism  reasserted,  p.  139. 

h  Part  i.  chap.  20.  §.  2,  3,  4. 

'  [See  an  account  of  this  author  above,  at  p.  44.] 

^  [See  above,  p.  44.] 


Novatiana  and  Donatists.  151 

that  may  take  with  some  very  ignorant  people,  but  chap. iv 
I  believe  not  approved  by  the  more  knowing  or  y^^^  after 
candid  of  his  own  opinion,  to  quote  for  some  matter  ^Y,^^"" 
of  ancient  history,  an  author  that  is  but  of  yester- 
day, and  f)f  no  note  or  credit.  When  a  vulgar  reader 
sees  such  a  quotation,  he  thinks  it  as  good  as  the 
best,  because  he  knows  not  the  author :  but  one  of 
any  reading  slights  it  for  that  reason,  because  he 
knows  him  not.  It  is  this  man's  Avay  through  all 
his  book,  to  quote  for  the  principal  things  that  are 
in  dispute  concerning  antiquity,  such  books  as  the 
foresaid  Frank  and  Twisk,  and  one  Mehrning^,  and 
a  book  that  he  calls  Dutch  Martyrology'".  They 
are  all,  as  it  seems,  Dutch  writers  of  late  years,  of 
the  antipcedobaptists'  way :  and  if  they  say  all  that 
he  quotes  them  for,  they  say  things  without  any 
regard  whether  they  be  true  or  false.  It  is  a  known 
rule,  that  any  modern  writer  affirming  any  thing 
of  ancient  history,  without  referring  to  some  ancient 
author,  is  not  at  all  to  be  heeded.  These  men 
might  as  well  have  quoted  him,  as  he  them  ;  and  it 
had  been  a  like  authority. 

One  shall  not  see  Mr.  Baxter  in  such  a  passion  as 
he  is  in  this  place :  to  premise  to  the  answers  that 
he  gives  to  the  several  quotations  about  these  No- 
vatians  and  Donatists,  such  sayings  as",  '  Utterly 
'  false:'  '  False  again:'  *  This  is  something,  were  it 

'  [This  book,  so  often  quoted  by  Danvers,  under  the  name  of 
Jacob  Merningus'  (or  Mehrning'sj  History  of  Baptism,  I  have 
not  been  able  to  find.] 

™  [Danvers  cites  this  work  as  '  The  Dutch  Martyrology,  called 
'  The  bloody  Theatre;  a  most  elaborate  and  worthy  Collection  : 
'  written  in  Dutch,  bv  Th.  .1.  Van  Braght.'  I  have  never  seen 
it.] 

"  More  Proofs,  &c.  p   249,  &c.  and  241,  &c. 
K  2 


132  Novatians  and  Donatists. 

CHAP.  IV.  *  true  :  but  it  is  such  a  kind  of  falsehood  as  I  must 


Year  after  '  not  name  in  its  due  epithets :'  '  Not  a  word  of 

sties^^°"      *  truth :'  '  No  such  matter  in  that  chapter,  or  the 

'  whole  book  :'  '  Blush,  reader,  for  such  a  man  :'  '  Mr. 

*  Bagshaw  is  now  quite  overdone  in  the  quality  of 
'  untruths,'  &c. 

I  produced  in  the  Collection  ^  a  canon  of  a  coun- 
cil of  Carthage,  wherein  they  decree  what  is  to  be 
done  in  reference  to  that  question  ;  whether  they 
should  admit  to  any  office  of  the  clergy  those  who 
in  their  infancy,  before  they  could  judge  of  the 
error,  had  been  baptized  by  the  Donatists,  and  after- 
ward came  over  to  the  church.  CassanderP  and  Mr. 
Cobbefi  had  brought  this  as  a  proof,  that  the  Do- 
natists, as  well  as  catholics,  baptized  infants.  This 
writer  says  ^,  '  that  is  but  a  supposition  at  best 
'  that  they  might  do  so.'  But  I  doubt  any  one 
else  will  take  it  for  a  plain  supposition  that  they 
ordinarily  did  so. 

That  challenge  of  St.  Austin,  and  confession  of 
Pelagius,  produced  before^,  that  they  never  knew 
nor  heard  of  any  heretics  or  schismatics  that  were 
against  the  baptizing  of  infants,  must  be  an  unde- 
niable proof  that  neither  of  these  two  sects  were  so  : 
since  a  considerable  body  of  each  of  them  were  re- 

o  Part  i.  chap.  i6.  §.  i,  2. 

p  [See  Georgius  Cassander,  De  Baptismo  Infantium,  80.  Colon. 
1563.  reprinted  in  his  Opera  Omnia,  fol.  Paris.  1616.] 

q  [See  'A  just  Vindication  of  the  Covenant  and  Church-estate 

*  of  Children  of  Church-members ;  as  also  of  their  Right  unto 
'  Baptism.  By  Thomas  Cobbet,  teacher  of  the  Church  of  Lyn 
'  in  New-England.'  4".  London,  1648.  p.  296.  The  passage 
referred  to  occurs  at  p.  291.] 

■■  Treat,  of  Baptism,  part  ii.  chap.  7. 
s  Parti,  chap.  19.  §.  17  and  30. 


The  Arians.  133 

maining  in  those  parts  where  these  two  men  lived  :  chap.iv. 
and  all  their  particular  opinions  were  the  subject  of  Year  after 
every  day's  disputations.  And  St.  Austin,  in  his^^j^^P°" 
book  of  Sects,  wrote  a  particular  of  their  tenets*, 
as  well  as  of  all  the  rest.  And  yet  since  my  last 
edition,  an  antipaedobaptist  writer,  Mr.  Davye^  has 
printed  over  again  what  Danvers  had  said  of  the 
Britons,  the  Novatians,  the  Donatists,  denying  in- 
fant-baptism ;  without  having  a  word  to  say  to  the 
confutation  of  that  pretence  by  Baxter,  Wills,  &:c. 
or  in  my  book ;  which  yet  he  had  seen.  And 
hunting  further  for  some  antipaedobaptists  among 
the  schismatics  of  those  times,  has  laid  a  claim  to 
the  Pelagians  :  who,  when  they  were  expiring,  left 
behind  them  (as  I  have  shewn  part  i.  ch.  19-  and 
a  little  more  fully  in  a  Defence  of  this  book)  an 
eternal  anathema  against  any  that  should  deny  in- 
fant-baptism, or  say  that  they  denied  it. 

III.  The  Arians  are  by  some  catholic  writers 
styled  anabaptists.  These  also  made  a  considerable 
body  of  men  in  some  part  of  our  period  of  time, 
viz.  of  the  first  300  years  after  the  apostles.  Espe-  240- 
cially  in  the  time  of  the  emperors,  Constantius  and^7°- 
Valens ;  who  took  almost  the  same  methods  to  force 
their  subjects  to  turn  Arians,  or  at  least  to  hold 
communion  with  the  Arians,  as  the  French  king 
does  at  this  day  to  force  his  to  turn  papists,  or  go 
to  mass.  If  the  writer  whom  we  have  been  follow- 
ing for  some  time,  had  ever  heard  of,  or  lighted  on, 

t  De  Hseresibus,  cap,  69.  [Op.  torn.  viii.  p.  21.  ed.  Bene- 
dict.] 

1  [Mr.  Thomas  Davye  (of  Leicester),  in  a  book  called,  '  The 
'  Baptism  of  Adult  Believers  only  vindicated.'  8vo.  1719.] 


134  The  Arians. 

CHAP.iv.  those  places  where  the  Arians  are  called  anabap- 
Year  after  tists  ;  I  am  persuacled  he  would  have  increased  the 
sties!^°  catalogue  of  his  friends  with  one  sect  more.  I  would 
not  have  the  antipaedobaptists  claim  any  acquaint- 
ance with  so  ill  company:  and  therefore  do  give 
them  an  account  of  the  reason  why  they  had  that 
name.  It  was  not  for  that  they  had  any  thing  to 
say  against  infant-baptism :  but  because  they,  as 
well  as  the  Donatists  before  them,  did  use  to  bap- 
tize over  again  such  as  came  from  the  catholic 
church  to  them  ;  not  for  that  they  had  been  bap- 
tized in  infancy,  (for  if  they  had  been  baptized  at 
man's  age  it  was  all  one,)  but  for  that  they  had  re- 
ceived baptism  from  the  catholics,  whom  the  Arians 
did  so  hate,  that  they  would  not  own  any  baptism 
given  by  them  to  be  good.  This  is  evident  both 
from  St.  Austin,  who  recites  their  tenets'^,  and  also 
from  an  oration  of  St.  Ambrose,  which  I  mentioned 
before,  against  Auxentius  the  Arian  ^ :  where  he 
says,  '  Cur  igitur  rebaptizandos,'  &c.  '  Why  does 
*  Auxentius  say,  that  the  faithful  people,  who  have 
'  been  baptized  in  the  name  of  the  Trinity,  must 
'  be  baptized  again  V  And  this  is  all  that  the  word 
anabaptist  signifies ;  '  one  that  baptizes  over  again 
'  those  that  have  been  baptized  already.'  And  there- 
fore those  of  the  antipaedobaptists  that  know  the 
signification  of  the  word,  do  not  own  the  name ; 
they  denying  theirs  to  be  rebaptizing. 

The  instance  of  the  emperor  Valens,  that  I  gave 
before^",  (whom  St.  Basil  exhorted  to  have  his  child 

n  De  Hseresibus,  cap.  49. 

"  [Apud  Op.  torn.  ii.  p.  874.  sect.  37.  edit.  Benedict.] 

y  Part  i.  chap.  12.  sect.  9,  10. 


Tlie  Valentinians.  135 

baptized  by  the  catholic  bishops,  but  he  chose  to  chap.v. 
have  it  done  by  the  Arians,)  is  a  clear  proof  that  Year  after 
Arians  as  well  as  catholics  baptized  infants.  ^^  ^^°- 


CHAP.  V. 


0/  some  heretics  that  denied  all  water-baptism.  And  of 
others  that  baptized  .the  same  person  several  times  over. 
The  dispute  in  the  catholic  church  concerning  rebap- 
tizing.  Of  the  Paidianists,  xohom  the  Nicene  Fathers 
ordered  to  be  baptized  anew,  if  they  would  come  into 
the  church. 

I.  WHAT  St.  Austin  and  Pelagius  said  of  all 
heretics  (that  they  had  ever  heard  of)  allowing  in- 
fant-baptism, must  be  understood  of  such  as  allowed 
any  baptism  at  all.  For  otherwise,  they  knew  there 
were  some  sects  that  renounced  all  use  of  it  to  any 
persons,  infants  or  others.  And  St.  Austin  had 
himself  been  of  one  of  them.  And  he  does  indeed 
express  a  limitation  that  is  of  the  same  effect,  when 
he  says,  '  All  that  do  receive  the  scriptures  of  the 
'  Old  and  New  Testament,  do  own  infant-baptism 
'  for  the  remission  of  sins'' :'  for  those  that  denied 
all  water-baptism  did  also  generally  renounce  the 
scriptures. 

It  may  be  worth  the  while  to  gratify  the  Quakers 
with  a  short  catalogue  of  all  their  ancient  friends 
in  that  point  of  denying  baptism,  that  were  within 
our  period. 

The  historians  that  have  given  us  the  tale  of  all 
the  heresies  they  had  heard  of,  have  been  much  too 
liberal  of  that  name.  For  they  have  given  the 
name  of  heretics  to  some  that  deserved  a  worse,  and 

z  See  the  words,  part  i.  chap.  19.  sect.  17. 


136  The  Valentinians. 

CHAP.v.  should  have  been  called  infidels ;  and  also  to  some 
Year  after  that  deserved  one  not  so  bad,  and  should  have  gone 
sties'*^"      for  distracted  people. 

Of  the  first  sort  were  the  Valentinians,  who  made 
use  of  the  name  of  Christ  only  to  mock  and  abuse 
the  religion  :  their  own  religion  being  a  mixture  of 
idolatry,  magic,  and  lascivious  rites.  They  blas- 
phemed the  scriptures  as  false ^  ;,  and  the  catholics  as 
carnal ;  and  both,  as  giving  a  wrong  account  of 
Jesus  Christ,  of  whom  they  made  quite  another  sort 
of  being. 

Of  these  Irenaeus  reckons  up  several  sorts,  which 
had  their  several  opinions  concerning  baptism.  I 
gave  a  general  account  of  them  before'',  out  of  the 
18th  [21st  of  the  Benedictine  edition]  chapter  of 
Irenceus'  first  book :  and  here  you  shall  have  Ire- 
naeus'  words. 

Having  premised,  that  'in  this  sect  there  are  as 
'  many  aTroXv-rpuxrei^,  redemptions,  [or,  ways  of  bap- 
'  tism,]  as  there  are  ringleaders,'  he  adds, 

*  Some  of  them    dress   up  a  bride-chamber,  and 

*  perform  mystical  ceremonies  with  certain  profane 
'  words  to  those  whom  they  initiate  ;  and  call  this 
'a  "spiritual  marriage,"   which  they    say    is   made 

*  according  to  the  likeness  of  the  "  heavenly  conju- 
'  gations." 

'  Others  bring  the  party  to  the  water,  and  as 
'  they  are  baptizing  use  these  words :  "  In  the 
'  name  of  the  unknown  Father  of  all  things :  in 
'  the  truth  the  mother  of  all  things  :  in  him  that 
'  came  down  on  JESUS :  in  the  union  and  redemp- 
'  tion  and  communion  of  powers." 

'  Some,  that  they  may  amuse  those  whom  they 

a  Irenaeus,  lib.  iii   cap.  2.  ^  Part  i.  chap.  21.  §.  2. 


The  Valentinians.  137 

'initiate,    use    certain     Hebrew     words;     Basema,CHAP.v. 

*  Chamasi,  Baceaiiora,  &c.  Year  after 

'  Others  of  them  again  express  their  redemption  ff  J^^*'" 

*  [or  baptism]  thus ;  "  The  name  that  is  hidden 
'  from  every  deity,  dominion,  and  truth  :  which 
'  Jesus  of  Nazareth  put  on  in  the  zones  of  light," 
*&c. 

'  And  he  that  is  initiated   [or  baptized]  answers, 

*  "  I  am  confirmed  and  redeemed  :  and  I  redeem  my 

*  soul  from  this  iEON  and   all  that  comes  of  it,  in 

*  the  name  of  lAO,"  &c. 

*  Then    they    anoint    the    baptized    person    with 

*  balsam,  for  they  say  this  ointment  is  the  type  of 
'  that  sweetness  which  surpasses  all  things.'  [Note, 
that  this  is  the  first  mention  of  chrism  that  is  any 
where  read  of.  And  since  I  shall  shew  presently,  at 
chap.  ix.  that  it  was  used  by  the  catholics  from  tes- 
timonies of  near  the  same  date  as  this  ;  one  may 
conclude  that  it  came  from  some  principle  univer- 
sally received  by  all  Christians,  catholic  or  he- 
retic] 

'  Some  of  them  say,  that  it  is  needless  to  bring 

*  the  person  to  the  water  at  all :  but  making  a  mix- 

*  ture   of  oil   and  water,  they  pour  it  on  his  head, 

*  using  certain  profane  words,  much  like  them  be- 
'  forementioned  :  and  they  say  that  that  is  redemp- 
'  tion  [or  baptism].     This  sort  use  balsam  also. 

'  But  others  of  them  rejecting  all  these  things, 
'  say,  "  that  the  mystery  of  the  unspeakable  and  in- 
'  visible  power,  ought  not  to  be  performed  by  visible 
'  and  corruptible  elements  :  nor  that  of  incompre- 
'  hensible  and  incorporeal  things  be  represented  by 
'  sensible  and  corporeal  things.  But  that  the  know- 
'  ledge  of  the  unspeakable  majesty  is  itself  perfect 


138  Qiiintilla.     The  Manichees. 

cHAP.v. '  redemption  [or  baptism].'    These  last,  I  suppose, 

Year  after  ^^^^  ^^  owned  for  fHends. 

sties*^°  II.  Tertullian  wrote  his  book  of  baptism,  that  he 

I  oo.  might  put  a  stop  to  the  heresy  that  had  been  set  on 
foot  by  one  Quintilla,  a  woman  preacher,  that  had 
been  at  Carthage  a  little  before  ;  and  had,  as  he 
says  ^,  seduced  a  great  many.  The  main  of  her 
preaching  was  against  water-baptism :  '  that  it  was 
'  needless :  that  faith  alone  was  sufficient,'  &c.  She 
had  come  out,  as  he  understood,  from  the  sect  of  the 
Caians.  That  sect,  as  impious  as  it  was  in  other 
things*^,  did  not  deny  baptism,  that  we  read  of. 
She  had,  it  seems,  added  that  herself.  He  there 
largely  sets  forth  the  falseness  of  her  doctrine, 
and  also  her  masculine  impudence  in  usurping  the 
office  of  a  preacher  of  it,  though  it  had  been  never 
so  true. 
200.  III.  The  Manichees  are  the  next :  as  little  de- 
serving the  name  of  Christians  as  the  rest,  and  less 
than  the  Mahometans  do.  They  made  the  same  ac- 
count of  their  Manes,  as  these  do  of  Mahomet.  They 
owned  Christ  to  be  a  true  prophet,  as  these  do ;  and 
Peter,  Paul,  John,  &c.,  to  have  been  his  true  apo- 
stles. But  they  said  (as  these  also  do)  that  the 
books  which  we  have  of  theirs  are  no  true  records, 
but  had  been  falsified.  And  the  same  absurdity 
which  the  Christians  now  do  urge  against  these,  St. 
Austin  urged  against  them  :  '  that  if  they  plead  our 
*  copies  are  falsified,  they  ought  at  least  to  produce 
'  such  as  are  truer.'  And  he,  who  had  been  once 
seduced  by  them,   tells  us    what  they   held    as  to 

c  De  Baptismo,  cap.  i. 

•I  Epiphan.  de  Caianis,  Hser.  38.  [sive  18. — Op.  torn,  i.p.  276. 
edit.  Petavii,  1622.] 


The  Messalians.  139 

baptism*',    'they    say    that   baptism   in   water    does  chap. v. 
*  nobody   any  good :    neither   do    they  baptize    any  Year  after 
'of   the    proselytes    wdiom   they   delude    into    their ^^^p"- 
'  sect; 

Yet  St.  Cyril  of  Jerusalem  ^  intimates,  that  they 
had  something  instead  of  baptism.  '  Their  bap- 
'  tism,'  says  he,  '  is  such  as  I  dare  not  describe  before 
'  men  and  women.  I  am  afraid  to  tell  in  what 
'  matter  it  is  that  they  dipping  a  fig  give  it  to  their 
'  wretched  people.'  Yet  he  intimates  what  it  was  : 
but  it  is  so  beastly  that  I  will  not  do  that. 

IV.  The  Messalians  seem  to  have  been  no  other  260. 
but  a  sort  of  enthusiastical  people,  who  leaving  off 
their  employments,  thought  it  necessary,  or  at  least 
pleasing  to  God,  to  spend  all  their  time  in  jn-ayer 
and  rapture.  And  thereby  became  subject  to  many 
hypochondriac  conceits.  Epiphanius  and  St.  Austin 
speaking  of  them  in  their  catalogues,  say  nothing  of 
their  denying  baptism.  But  Theodoret  ^,  and  the 
Historia  Tripartita  ^  out  of  him,  repeats  their 
sense  thus  ;  '  that  there  is  no  profit  accruing  to  the 
'  baptized  by  baptism :  but  that  fervent  prayer  only 
'  expels  the  Devil.'  And  says, '  that  the  most  noted 
'  men  of  their  sect  were  Dadoes,  (or  Daodes,  or 
'  Dadosius,)  Sabbas,  (or  Sebas,)  Adelphius,  Hermas, 
'  Symeones.' 

What  does  Mr.  Danvers  do,  but  put  down  these 
men  ^  for  '  eminent  persons  that  in  the  fourth  cen- 
'  tury  bore  witness  against  infant-baptism  ?'     And  he 

e  De  Hseresibus,  cap.  46.  [Op.  torn.  viii.  p.  17.  C.  edit.  Bene- 
dict.] 

f  Catech.  6.  [cap.  33.]  ^  Lib.  iv.  cap.  1 1 . 

^  Cassiodorus,  Hist.  Trip.  lib.  vii,  cap.  i  i. 
•  Treatise  of  Baptism,  part  ii.  chap.  7. 


140  The  Messalians. 

CHAP.  V.  cites  for  authority  the  foresaid  j3lace  ;  Hist.  Tri'part, 

Year  after  ^^^*  ^"*  ^^P"  ^^^  ^"^^^   which  whoevcr  looks  will  see 
theapo-     that  the  error  there  laid   to   their  charge   is  in  the 

sties.  1.1 

words  that  I  have  set  down,  and  no  other:  which 
exj)ress  the  opinion  of  the  Quakers,  not  of  the 
antipaedobaptists. 

But  he  quotes  also  Sebastian  Frank  (one  of  the 
Dutch  blades  I  mentioned  a  little  above  ^)  to  confirm 
that  this  Dadosius,  Sebas,  &c.,  were  eminent  wit- 
nesses against  infant-baptism.  So  that  it  is  to  be 
hoped  for  Danvers'  credit,  that  he  had  never  looked 
into  Historia  Toipartita^  but  had  taken  the  quo- 
tation on  the  credit  of  Frank,  which  must  be  very 
small. 

But  if  one  read  the  whole  passage  in  Theodoret, 
Hist.  Eccl.  lib.  iv.  cap.  11,  and  Hcsretic.  Fabul. 
lib.  iv.  cap.  de  Messalianis,  it  is  plain  that  the 
men  were  distracted.  For  they  pretended  that  by 
force  of  their  prayer  they  could  bring  the  Devil  out 
of  themselves,  sometimes  by  spittle,  and  sometimes 
by  blowing  their  nose :  they  would  dance  about, 
and  say  they  were  treading  upon  him  :  they  would 
imitate  archers,  and  then  say  they  had  shot  him. 
And  that  after  the  Devil  was  gone  from  them,  they 
could  see  the  holy  Trinity  with  bodily  eyes.  They 
were  also  full  of  prophecies  and  revelations.  And 
St.  Hierome,  who  had  lived  in  Syria  among  them, 
says ',  that  they  said  of  themselves,  that  '  when  they 
*  were  come  to  the  top  of  their  perfection,  they  were 
'  beyond  any  possibility  of  sinning,  in  thought,  or  by 
'  ignorance.' 

The  historians  that  have  encumbered  the  church 

^  Chap.  iv.  §.  2.  '  Prolog,  ad  Dialog,  contra  Pelag. 


The  Messalians.  141 

registers  with  these,  and  some  other  such  sorts  of  chap.  v. 
sects,  would  at  the  same  rate,  if  they  had  had  in  Year  after 
any  country   at   any  time   a   dozen   or  two   of  our*|^j^*P°' 
Muggletonians  ™,  have  made  a  considerable  sect  of 
them,  to  be  talked  of  in  church-history  to  the  end 
of  the  world.     Whereas  such  men,  especially  when 
inconsiderable  for  number,  should  be  pitied  in  their 
lifetime,   and   kept   dark  ;  and   their   wild    opinions 
forgot  after  they  are  dead.     And  this  method  would 
have  lessened  the  catalogues  of  sects  almost  by  one 
half. 

Some  "  do  reckon  besides  these,  the  Ascodruti,  and 
the  Archontici,  as  sects  that  used  no  baptism.  But 
Theodoret  says°,  that  the  Ascodruti  were  a  branch 
of  the  Valentinians ;  and  the  Archontici  of  them : 
which  I  am  very  glad  of,  being  weary  of  reckoning 
any  more. 

St.  Austin  saysP,  a  sect  called  Seleucians,  or  Her- 
mians,  do  not  admit  of  water-baptism,  nor  of  the 
resurrection. 

These  are  the  sects  that  have  renounced  all  use 
of  baptism. 

i»  [An  obscure  religious  sect,  which  arose  in  England  during 
the  times  of  the  Commonwealth :  so  denominated  from  their 
leader  Lodowick  IMuggleton,  a  journeyman  tailor,  who  with 
J.  Reeves  his  associate  pretended  to  high  gifts  of  prophecy,  and 
gave  out  that  they  were  God's  two  witnesses,  who  were  to 
appear  shortly  before  the  end  of  the  world. 

For  a  brief  account  of  these  enthusiasts  consult  the  Supple- 
ment to  Collier's  Dictionary  ;  and  a  note  to  the  article  Sweden- 
borgians,  in  Evans'  Sketch  of  the  Denominations  of  the  Chris- 
tian Woi-ld,  p.  260.  edit.  181 1.] 

°  Epiph.  de  Archonticis,  [Hseres.  xx.  vol.  xl.  Op.  tom.  i. 
p.  291.] 

o  Haeret.  fab.  lib.  i.  cap.  10.  [[Op.  tom.  iv.  p.  201.] 

P  De  Hser.  cap.  59.  [Op.  tom.  viii.  p.  20.] 


142  Marcionists.     Muscovites. 

CHAP.  V.      Y.  Some  on  the  other  extreme  have  administered 


Year  after  it  Several  times  to  the  same  person  ;  and  are  there- 
sties!^°  fore  properly  called  anabaptists.  I  speak  now  of 
those  that  practised  formal  anabaptism,  i.  e.  what 
they  themselves  owned  to  be  anabaptism,  or  rebap- 
tizing  of  the  same  person.  And  of  such  I  remem- 
ber no  more  in  ancient  times,  but  the  Marcionists. 
4o-Marcion  taught,  as  Epiphanius  says",  that  'it  is 
'  lawful  to  give  three  baptisms:  so  that  if  any  one 
'  fall  into  sin  after  his  first  baptism,  he  may  have 
'  a  second ;  and  a  third,  if  he  fall  a  second  time.' 
And  here  it  seems  he  stopped  his  hand.  Yet  Epi- 
phanius says,  that  he  had  heard  that  his  *  followers 
'  went  further,  and  gave  more  than  three,  if  any 
'  one  desired  it.' 

He  that  writes  the  Present  State  of  Muscovy, 
says  °,  their  way  is,  that  '  persons  of  age,  who 
'  change  their  religion,  and  embrace  the  Muscovite 
'  faith ;  nay  even  Muscovites,  who  having  changed 
'  their  religion   in  another   country,   are  willing   to 

*  return  to  their  own  communion,  must  first  be 
'  rebaptized.'  He  speaks  also  of  some  vagabond 
people  among  them,  called  Chaldseans,  who  do  cus- 
tomarily, and  by  a  sort  of  license,  practise  great 
extravagancies  from  the  18th  of  December  to  Epi- 
phany ;  during  which  time  they  are  excluded  the 
church :  but  '  on  twelfth  day,  when  their  license  is 

*  expired,  they  are  rebaptized,  (some  of  them  having 
'  been   baptized    ten   or   twelve  times,)  and   looked 

"  Hseres.  42.  [seu  22.]  Marcionistse.  [Sect.  3.  apud  Op. 
torn.  i.  p.  302,  &c.] 

o  Dr.  Crull,  chap.  1  i .  [The  Ancient  and  Present  State  of 
Muscovy,  by  J.  Crull,  M  .D.  2  vols.  8vo.  Lond.  1698.  vol.  i. 
p.  194.] 


Jbassens.     Sahceans.  143 

'  upon  as  good  Christians.'    But  Brerewoodv,  cli.  23,  chap.  v. 
says,  (and  quotes  Possevin  for  it,)  that  they  use  not  Year  after 
this  baptism  on  twelfth  day,  as  a  sacrament,  or  as^^^P"" 
any  purification  of  themselves  ;  but  only  as  a  memo- 
rial of  Christ's  baptism  received  on  that  day  in  Jor- 
dan :  and   that   the   Abassenes   do   the   same    thing 
upon  the  same  day  upon  the  same  account.     So  that 
it  is  to  be  hoped  that  Dr.  Crull  may  be  mistaken  in 
the  reason  of  their  practice.     And  for  what  he  says 
here  of  their  rebaptizing  all  that  came  over  to  their 
religion ;  I  have  occasion  to  note  something  on  it, 
at  chap.  ix.  §.  2. 

Mr.  Thevenot  also  tells  a  story  ^  of  some  people 
called  Sabseans,  living  at  Bassora  in  Arabia,  that 
are,  as  he  there  says,  improperly  called  Christians, 
that  do  reiterate  the  baptism  which  they  use.  But 
it  is  not  the  Christian  baptism,  nor  given  in  that 
form.  They  have,  he  says,  no  knowledge  of  Jesus 
Christ,  but  that  he  was  a  servant  to  John  Baptist, 
and  baptized  by  him  ;  and  of  the  books  of  the  gos- 
pel no  knowledge  at  all.  But  however  it  be  with 
any  late  sects,  in  ancient  times  there  were,  as  I  said, 
no  sects  that  did  this  but  the  Marcionists. 

I  know  that  the  name  of  anabaptists,  or  rebap- 
tizers,  was  then  by  the  catholics  imputed  to  several 
heretics,  and  by  some  churches  of  the  catholics  to 
other  catholic  churches.  But  they  that  were  so 
censured  did  none  of  them  own,  as  the  Marcionists 
did,  that  what  they  did  was  rebaptizing :  they  all 

P  [Enquiries  touching  the  diversity  of  Languages  and  Reli- 
gions, through  the  chief  parts  of  the  world,  by  Edw.  Brere- 
wood,  4to.  Lond.  ]62  2.  p.  169.] 

q  Voyage,  torn.  ii.  p.  331.  [Travels  into  the  Levant,  p.  ii. 
book  3.  chap.  1 1.  p.  164.  edit.  fol.  Lond.  1687.] 


144  Ancient  Disputes  about  rebaptizing. 

CHAP.  V.  pleaded  that,  the  baptism  which  the  party  had 
Year  after  received  befoie  was  null  and  void ;  as  being 
theapo-  administered  in  a  corrupt  church,  or  by  heretical 
2ro.  bishops,  &c. 

The  antipaedobaptists  now  hold  the  same  plea : 
but  the  ground  of  the  plea  is  very  different ;  for  I 
never  read,  and  I  believe  they  cannot  produce,  any 
instance  of  any  one  that  pleaded  baptism  to  be  void, 
because  it  was  given  in  infancy.  And  as  they  dis- 
own the  name  of  anabaptists,  or  rebaptizers  ;  so  I 
have  nowhere  given  it  to  them  :  as,  on  the  con- 
trary, I  do  not  give  them  the  name  of  Baptists, 
nor  of  the  baptized  people  ;  for  that  is  to  cast  a 
reproach  upon  their  adversaries,  as  concluding  that 
they  are  not  so.  Every  party,  while  the  matter 
continues  in  dispute,  ought  to  give  and  take  such 
names  as  cast  no  reproach  on  themselves  nor  their 
opponents,  but  such  as  each  of  them  own  :  and  such 
are  the  names  that  I  use. 

VI.  The  dispute  about  rebaptizing,  or  the  impu- 
tation thereof,  was  one  that  troubled  the  church  in 
former  times  as  much  as  any.  Many  sects  of  here- 
tics and  schismatics  were  so  bitter  against  the  catho- 
lics, that  they  said ;  All  things  were  so  corrupt 
among  them,  that  baptism,  or  any  other  office  done 
by  them,  was  null  and  void:  and  therefore  they 
baptized  afresh  all  that  came  over  from  the  church 
to  them.  And  many  churches  of  the  catholics  were 
even  with  them,  and  observed  the  same  course 
with  all  that  came  over  from  them.  But  others 
would  not :  but  said,  that  baptism,  though  given 
by  the  schismatics,  was  valid.  And  this  came  at 
last  to  be  a  bone  of  contention  betM'een  the  catho- 
lics themselves :    each  party  finding  fault  with  the 


The  PauUanists  and  Photinians.  I45 

churi   ""'^    '^    '''''''"^    schismatics    into     the  cha^. 

In  St.  Cyprian's   time,   the   Christian    world    was'^'aVo-" 
divided  into  halves  on  this  point.     For  he,  and  allfso!' 
the  churches  of  Africa,  some  of  Egypt,  and   many 
m  Asia,  received  not  heretics  into  the  church  with- 
out a  new  baptism  ;  and  one  of  the  apostolic  canons 
(can.  37,  ahas   46)  orders,  that  they  be  not  other- 
wise received.     But  the    Christians  at   Rome,  and 
most  in  Europe,  used  only  to  give  them  a  new  con- 
firmation,   or  laying   on    of  hands ;    and    so   admit 
them. 

Afterward,  this  came  to  be  a  rule-  that  *  they  ^00. 
'  that  came  to  the  catholic  church  from  such  sects 
'  as  used  not  the  right  form  of  baptism,  \in  the 
'  name  of  the  Father,  and  of  the  Son,  and  of  the 
'  Holi/  Spirit,-]  must  be  baptized  at  their  admis- 
'  sion :  but  they  that  in  any  sect  had  been  baptized 
'  with  those  words,  should  be  adjudged  to  have 
'  already  true  baptism.' 

VII.  Yet  the  Paulianists  were  excepted  from  this 
general  rule:  though  they,  as  Athanasius  informs  « 
used  the  said  form  of  baptizing;  yet  the  council  of 
Nice  expressly   decreed*,  Uhat  they  must   be   bap- 335 
'  tized  anew,  if  they  would  come  into   the  catholic 
'church.'      The   reason    seems    to    be;    that   they 
though  using  the  same  words,  of  Father,  Son,  and 

••  Basil,  de  Spiritu  Sancto,  cap.  i.  [Op.  torn.  ii.p.  291.  edit. 
F.  Duceei,  16,38.  torn.  iii.  p.  i.  edit.  Benedict.-Or  rather,  see 
his  first  canonical  epistle  to  Amphilochius,  being  the  i88th  in 
vol.  m.  of  the  Bened.  edit.  p.  268—270  ;    canon  ,.] 

«  Orat.  3.  contra  Arianos,  [Orat.  4.  cap.  30-36.  (Jp.  torn.  \. 
p.  640,  &c.  edit.  Benedict.] 

*  Can.  19. 

WALL,  VOL.  II.  I, 


146  Slanders  on  the  Fathers. 

CHAP.  V.  Holy   Spirit,   yet   meant   by   tliem    so    different   a 
Year  after  thing,  (foi"  they  took   the  Son  to  be  a  mere  man,) 
sties^'''*"      ^^^^  ^^^^y  were  judged  not  to  baptize  into  the  same 
faith,  nor  in  the  name   of  the  same  God,  that  the 
catholics  and  others  did. 
224.      This  shews  the  abhorrence  that    the    Christians 
at  that  time  had   of  an    opinion    that   would  now 
grow  fashionable.     And   Photinus,  a  little  after,  in 
the   time  of   Constantius,   did    no    sooner  make  an 
attempt  to  revive  this  heresy,  but  that  both  the  ca- 
tholics and  Arians  (though  they  could  hardly  agree  in 
any  thing  else)  agreed  in   condemning  him  and  his 
opinion  :     '  which  act  of  theirs,'   says   Socrates   the 
historian  ",  '  was  approved  of  all  men,  both  at  that 
'  time   present,   and   also   in    times   following.'     He 
means,  that   all   of  the   most    differing   parties   and 
opinions  agreed  that    such    a  doctrine  was  abomi- 
nable.    And  Theodoret,  who  lived  at  the  same  time 
with  Socrates,  having  reckoned  up  in  one  book  all 
the  sects  that    had    attributed    to  our  Saviour  no 
other  nature  than  human,  says  in  the  last  chapter 
.330- thereof ^,  'that  they  were   at  that  time  all  extinct 
'  and   forgotten ;  so  that  the   names  of  them   were 
*  known  to  but  few.'     And  so  they  have  continued 
till  of  very  late  years  :    unless  the  modern  abettors 
of  them    will    plead,    that    the   succession   of  their 
doctrine  has  been  preserved,  from  the  year  600,  in 
the  churches  of  Mecca  and  Medina. 

VIII.  It  appears  how  conscious  these  men  are, 
that  all  antiquity  is  against  them,  by  their  setting 
themselves  so  bitterly  against  it.  There  is  no  sect 
of  men  now    in    the    world   that   do   use   such  en- 

1  Lib.  ii.  cap.  29. 

^  H^ret.  Fab.  lib.  ii.  [c.  11.  Op.  torn.  iv.  p.  224.] 


Slanders  on  the  Fathers.  147 

deavours,  and  some  of  them  very  unfair  ones,  to  chap.  v. 
bring  all  the  ancient  Christians  and  their  writings  Year  after 
into  a  general  disrepute.  They  employ  and  en-*^'^P°- 
courage  some  persons  to  read  the  Fathers,  only  to 
weed  and  cull  out  of  them  some  sayings,  which, 
taken  by  themselves,  may  be  represented  either  ridi- 
culous, insipid,  or  heterodox.  They  also  collect  out 
of  history,  all  the  faults  or  miscarriages  that  any 
ancient  writer  has  been  charged  with  :  and  making 
a  bundle  of  this  stuff,  part  true,  part  false,  they 
present  it  to  their  proselytes,  and  even  to  the  world, 
as  the  life  of  such  a  Father  >" ;  or  as  a  specimen  of 
such  a  Father's  works.  They  give  a  great  many 
reasons  why  it  is  not  worth  the  while  to  read, 
study,  or  translate  the  discourses  of  these  ancients  : 
that  time  is  much  better  spent  in  reading  the  mo- 
dern criticisms  upon  the  text  of  Scripture,  which  do 
often  give  the  sense  thereof  such  a  turn,  as  to  make 
our  religion  to  be  a  very  different  thing  from  that 
which  has  been  all  along  the  religion  of  Christians. 
If  they  can  gain  this  point,  to  alienate  people  from 
any  regard  to  the  doctrine  and  faith  of  the  primi- 
tive times,  they  make  a  good  step,  not  only  for 
their  own  turn  to  overthrow  the  doctrine  of  the 
Trinity,  but  also  for  the  advantage  of  their  next 
successors  the  deists,  who  can  with  a  much  better 
grace  argue  against  a  religion  that  has  been  altered 
in  its  most  fundamental  points,  than  against  one 
that  has  continued  the  same  since  the  time  that  it 
was  once  delivered  to  the  saints. 

But  among  all   the   reproaches  cast  on    the  Fa- 
thers, there  is  none  so  scandalous  and  destructive  of 

y  [See  a  note  on  this  subject  above,  vol.  i.  p.  350.] 
L    2 


148  Slanders  on  the  Fathers. 

CHAP.  V.  the  credit  both,  of  the  Fathers  and  of  Christianity 
Year  after  itself,  Rs  is  One  that  they  have  lately  set  abroad; 
Ses!'^'''  ^^^-  t^^^t  t^e  doctrine  of  the  Trinity,  or  of  the 
Father,  Son,  and  Holy  Spirit,  in  whom  we  believe, 
and  in  whose  name  we  are  baptized,  is  (as  it  is  un- 
derstood, explained,  and  held  by  the  said  Fathers)  a 
doctrine  of  tritheism,  or  of  believing  in  three  Gods. 
I  may  repeat  their  sayings  :  for  they  are  industri- 
ously handed  about  in  the  English  tongue.  One  of 
them  says  thus  ^ : 

'  They  [the  Fathers]  thought  the  three  hypo- 
'  stases  [or  persons  in  the  Trinity]  to  be  three  equal 
'  Gods,  as  we  should  now  express  it.'  And  again  ^ ; 
'  Not  to  recur  to  the  Fathers,  whose  opinion  was 
'  quite  different  from  that  which  is  now  received : 
'  as    who,    properly    speaking,    affirmed    that    there 

*  were  three  consubstantial  Gods,  as  has  been  shewn 

*  by  Petavius,  Curcellseus,  Cudworth,  and  others.' 
And  again ;  '  Who,  to  speak  the  truth,  were  trithe- 
'  ists  rather  than   asserters  of  the  present  opinion  : 

*  for  they  believed  the  unity  of  substance,  not   the 

*  singularity  of  number,  as  Tertullian  speaks ;  that 
'  is,  that  the  substance  of  the  Father,  Son,  and  Holy 
'  Ghost  was  specifically  one,  but  numerically  three : 
'  as  the  learned  men  I  before  mentioned  have  clearly 
'  shewn,  and  might  more  largely  be  demonstrated.' 

This  spittle  of  an  outlandish  author  our  English 
Socinians  greedily  licked  up  :  and  to  any  thing  that 
was  offered  out   of  the   Fathers   they  have  in  their 

z  [M.  Le  Clerc,  in  his]  Supplement  to  Dr.  Hammond's  Annot. 
on  I  John  v.  6.  [4to.  London,  1699.] 

a  Ibid.  Preface.  [Or  see  the  Latin  edition,  Novum  Test. 
Hammondi  et  Clerici,  atom.  fol.  Francofurti,  1714.  tom.  ii. 
P-594-  §-5] 


Slanders  on  the  Fathers.  I49 

late   books   opposed   this  ;  that   '  the   Fathers  held  chap.  v. 
*  only  a  specifical  unity  of  the  Divine  nature,  and  v"^ — T"" 

,  '  i  ear  after 

the  persons  to  be  as  so  many  individuals ''.'     This^'^'^po- 
they  repeat  often,  and  refer  to  Curcelhrus'  undeniable'  ^^' 
proofs  of  it.     Of  which  bishop  Stillingfleet  taking 
notice,  did   in   his  Vindication   of  the  Doctrine   of 
the  Trinity,  ch.  vi.  answer  and   refute   particularly 
all  the  instances  brought  by  Curcellaeus,  in  a  large 
discourse,   from  p.  76,   to  p.  100%   bringing,   as    he 
expresses  it  himself,  '  undeniable  proofs'  that  Cur- 
cellseus  had  mistaken  their  meaning. 

IX.  Notwithstanding  this,  what  does  the  fore- 
said author  do,  but  three  years  after  the  publica- 
tion of  Stillingfleet's  book,  writing  some  Critical 
Epistles,  loads  them  with  the  same  slanders  re- 
peated, M'ithout  taking  any  notice  that  they  had 
been  answered  ?  saying,  '  that  the  Nicene  Fathers 
'  thought  the  Divine  nature  is  no  otherwise  one 
'  than  specifically,  but  that  it  is  in  number  three- 
'  fold :  as  Petavius,  Curcellaeus,  Cudworth,  and 
'  others  have  proved  by  such  arguments,  as  that 
'  there  can  nothing  be  said  in  answer  to  them^V 

In  another  of  the  said  epistles  he  repeats  the 
same  slander,  and  would  father  it  on  some  learned 
men  in  England.     He  says,  '  learned  men  in  Enff- 

b  Defence  of  the  brief  History  of  the  Unitarians,  [against  Dr. 
Sherlock's  Answer,  4to,  Lond.  ,691.]  p.  5.  Answer  to  La  Moth 
[viz.  Reflections  on  two  discourses  concerning  the  Divinity  of 
our  Saviour,  written  by  Monsieur  Lamoth,  in  French,  and  done 
into  English.  Written  to  J.  S.  4to.  London, 1693.  pp.  24.]  Letter 
to  the  University,  p.  13. 

c  [Of  the  second  edition,  8vo.  London,  1697.] 
d  Epist.  3.  ad  Episcop.  Sarisb.  p.  108.    [See  Jo.  Clerici  Epi- 
stolse  Criticee,  (forming  the  third  volume  of  his  Ars  critica)  i  2mo. 
Amstelodami,  1700.] 


150  The  Fathers  no  Tritheists. 

CHAP.v.  '  land,  and  elsewhere,  do  not  forbear  to  say  openlj, 
Year  after  '  that  the  Niceno  Fathers  believed  three  eternal  and 
Jg^^P*'"      '  equal  essences  in  God ;  and  not  one  God  in  num- 

*  ber^.'  And  having  mentioned,  that  several  protes- 
tant  churches  have  received  the  Nicene  Creed  into 
their    public    confessions,   he    adds:  '  If  then    they 

*  will  stand  to  this  part  of  their  confession,  they 
'  must  own  that  they  believe  three  eternal  natures, 

*  and  renounce  the  numerical  unity  of  God.  Or  if 
'  they  will  not  do  that,  they  must  expunge  that 
'  article  of  their  confession,  in  which  they  own  the 

*  Nicene  faith.' 

And  these  letters  he  ventures  to  send  into  Eng- 
land, directed  to  bishops  there,  who  he  must  needs 
think  abominated  such  exorbitant  sayings ;  and 
who  could  easily,  if  he  had  had  the  prudence  to 
consult  them  first,  have  satisfied  him  that  one  of 
their  brethren  had  long  ago  answered  all  those 
proofs  of  Curcellseus  with  wdiich  he  made  such  a 
noise :  Petavius'  and  Cudworth's  instances  being 
not  so  considerable,  nor  so  maliciously  urged. 

Our  church  is  not  wont  to  take  such  affronts,  and 
continue  silent  under  them,  unless  when  the  party  is 
accounted  of  so  little  credit  as  to  be  not  worth  the 
answering.  The  learned  men  therein  (and  especially 
the  most  learned  person  against  whom  these  epistles 
were  directed)  would  probably  have  spent  some 
pains  to  vindicate  the  church  of  Christ  from  so  foul 
a  slander,  but  that  they  thought  the  falsehood  of 
this  imputation  of  the  Fathers  had  been  already 
sufficiently  shewn. 

Here  I  did  in  the  first  edition  take  notice,  that 
gome  passages  written  a  great  while  ago  by  a  right 
e  Id.  in  Epist.  5.  ad  Episcop.  Vigorn.  p,  177. 


The  Fathers  no  Tritheists.  151 

reverend  bishop,  (of  which  others  also  had  taken  chap.  v. 
notice  before,)  did  seem  to  incline  to  this  opinion  of  {~^^ 
Mr.  Le  Clerc  concerning-  the  Fathers.     Of  which  I  *^  ^po- 

^  sties. 

have  no  more  to  say,  than  what  I  have  said  in  the 
preface  of  this  second  edition  f. 

X.   Mr.  Le  Clerc  brings  some  pretended  proofs  of 
the  tritheism  of  the  ancients,  of  his  own  collection?: 
of  which  bishop  Stillingfleet  took  no  notice,  they 
being    not    in    Curcellaeus.     They    are    sayings,    or 
pieces  of  sayings,  of  the  Fathers,  so  partially  picked 
out  and  unfairly  represented,  that  at  that  rate  one 
might  abuse  and  misrepresent  any  writer ;  even  the 
Scripture  itself.     He  mentions  in  the  words  before 
recited,  a  scrap  of  a  sentence  of  Tertullian  in  his 
book  against  Praxeas,  c.  25^.     The  whole  sentence  loo. 
runs  thus :  '  Ita  connexus  Patris  in  Filio,  et  Filii  in 
'  Paraclete  tres  efficit,  cohserentes  alteram  ex  altero ; 
'  qui  tres  unum  sint,  non  unus :  quomodo  dictum  est, 
'■Ego  et  Pater  unum  sum  us ;  ad   substantiae  unita- 
'  tern,  non  ad  numeri  singularitatem.'  'Thus  the  con- 
'  nexion  of  the  Father  in  the  Son,  and  the  Son  in 
*  the  Holy  Spirit,  makes  that  there  are  three  that 
'  cohere  in  one  another ;  which  three  are  unum,  one 
'  substance,   not   unus,   one    person :    as    it    is    said, 
'  /  and   the    Father   are   unum,    one   substance ;  to 
'  denote  the  unity  of  substance,  not  the  singularity 
'  of  number.     That  is,  (as  Mr.  Le  Clerc  says,)  the 
'  substance  of  the  Father,  Son,  and   Holy  Spirit  is 
'  specifically  one,  but  numerically  three.'     But  that 
is  (as  any  one  else  will  say)  to  denote  the  unity  of 

'  [For  some  account  of  the  pai'ticulars  here  alluded  to,  see  a 
note  attached  to  the  preface  of  this  edition.] 

S  [In  his  Adnotationes  in  loc.  i  Joh.  v.  6.  p.  594,  edit.  1714.] 
^  [Op-  P-5'5-] 


152  The  Numerical  Unity  of 

CHAP.v.  substance,  not  the  singularity  of  number  of  the 
Year  after  P^i'sons ;  or,  that  the  persons  are  not  numerically 
the  apo-     Qne  though  the  substance  is.     For  it  is  to  be  noted, 

sties.  '  ^ 

that  this  book  was  written  against  that  error  of 
Praxeas,  whereby  he  taught  that  Father,  Son,  and 
Holy  Ghost  are  one  person  :  to  confirm  which  he 
brought  that  place  of  Scripture,  /  and  the  Father 
are  one.  Tertullian  tells  him,  our  Saviour's  word 
there  is  unum,  which  denotes  one  substance ;  not 
U7ms,  which  would  have  denoted  one  person. 

And  though  the  design  of  the  book  be,  as  I  said, 
to  maintain  that  side  of  the  question  ;  that  there 
are  in  some  sense  three  in  the  Godhead,  (as  Praxeas 
had  maintained  the  contrary,  carrying  the  argu- 
ments for  the  unity  further  than  he  ought,)  yet  even 
in  this  book  there  are  more  than  twenty  passages 
in  which  Tertullian  aims  to  express  as  well  as  he 
can,  (for  they  had  not  then  so  determinate  an  use 
of  words,)  a  numerical  unity  of  the  substance,  or 
essence.     Particularly  this  passaged 

'  Igitur  unus  Deus  Pater,  et  alius  absque  eo  non 
'  est :  quod  ipse  inferens,  non  Filium  negat,  sed 
'  alium  Deum :  caeterum  alius  a  patre  filius  non  est. 

' Atquin    si    nominasset    ilium,    separasset,   ita 

'  dicens  :  "  Alius  praeter  me  non  est,  nisi  Filius  mens." 
'  Alium  enim  etiam  Filium  fecisset,  quem  de  aliis 
'  excepisset.  Puta  solem  dicere  :  "  Ego  sol,  et  alius 
'  pra3ter  me  non  est,  nisi  radius  mens  :"  nonne  de- 
'  notasses  vanitatem  ?  quasi  non  et  radius  in  sole 
*  deputetur.' 

*  So  there  is  one  God  the  Father,  and  there  is  no 
'  other  beside  him  :  which  he  aflfirming  does  not 
'  exclude  his  Son,  but  any  other  God :  and  the  Son 

'   Ch.  i8.  [p.  510.  edit.  Priorii.] 


Essence  in  the  Trinity.  153 

is  not  another  from  the  Father. It  would  have  chap.v. 


'  been  to   separate    [or  distinguish]  him,  if  he  had  Year  after 
'  named  him,  and  had  said,  "  There  is  no  other  beside  sties!^°" 
'  me,  except  my  Son."   It  had  been  to  make  his  Son 
'  another,  whom  he  had  excepted  out  of  those  that 

*  are  others.     Suppose  the  sun  shoukl  say :  "  I  am 

*  the  sun,  and  there  is  no  other  beside  me,  except 
'  my  light  [or  ray],"  would  you  not  judge  it  ab- 
'  surd  ?  As  if  the  light  were  not  counted  to  the 
'  sun  itself.' 

To  mention  one  passage  more  of  the  said  book, 
chap.  xxix.  where  he  is  answering  the  argument  of 
Praxeas,  who  had  said  ;  that  since  the  essence  [or 
substance]  of  the  Father  and  the  Son  is  one  and  the 
same,  the  Son  could  not  suffer  but  the  Father 
must  suffer  too.  And  where  Tertullian,  if  he  had 
thought  the  essence  of  the  Son  to  be  only  specifically 
the  same  with  that  of  the  Father,  and  not  numeri- 
cally, could  not  have  forborne  to  answer  so.  But  he 
answers  thus ;  that  the  Divine  nature  did  not  suffer 
at  all :  but  if  it  had,  that  argument  would  not  have 
concluded.  '  Nam  et  fluvius,  si  aliqua  turbulentia 
'  contaminatur,  quanquam   una   substantia  de  fonte 

*  decurrat,  nee  secernatur  a  fonte,  tamen  fluvii  in- 
'  juria  non  pertinebit  ad  fontem.  Et  licet  aqua 
'  fontis  sit  quae  patiatur  in  fluvio,  dum  non  in  fonte 

*  patitur,  sed  in  fluvio,  non  fons  patitur,  sed  fluvius 
'  qui  ex  fonte  est.  Ita,  etsi  spiritus  Dei  quid  pati 
'  posset  in  Filio,  quia  tamen  non  in  Patre  pateretur, 

*  sed  in  Filio,  Pater  passus  non  videretur.  Sed  sufii- 
'  cit  nihil  spiritum  Dei  passum  suo  nomine.' 

'  For  if  a  stream  be  puddled  with  any  disturb- 
'  ance,  though  it  be  the  same  substance  that  runs 

*  from    the    spring,   and    be   not    distinct   from   the 


154  Gregory  Nazianzen  maintains  the 

CHAP.v.  ♦  spring,  yet  the  hurt  of  the  stream  will  not  affect 

Year  after  '  the  Spring.     And  though  it  be  the  water  of  the 

sties?"       '  spring  which  suffers  in  the  stream,  yet  so  long  as 

'  it  suffers  in  the  stream,  and  not  in  the  spring,  the 

*  spring  does  not  suffer,  but  the  stream  which  is 
'  derived  from  the  spring.  So  though  the  Spirit  [or 
'  Deity]  of  God  could  suffer  any  thing  in  the  Son, 
'  yet  so  long  as  it  suffered  not  in  the  Father,  but  the 
'  Son,  the  Father  would  not  be  said  to  suffer.  But 
'  it  is  sufficient  [to  take  off  your  argument]  that  the 

*  divinity  suffered  not  at  all  in  its  own  nature.' 

If  he  had  thought  the  essence  to  be  only  specifi- 
cally the  same,  he  would  not  have  gone  so  far  for 
an  answer ;  the  aim  thereof  is  to  shew,  that  though 
it  be  numerically  the  same  in  both  persons,  yet 
something  might  be  said  of  one  of  them,  which 
could  not  be  said  of  the  other. 

But  in  other  books  the  same  writer  affirms  the 
numerical  unity  of  essence  more  plainly,  and  in  the 
tenns  of  the  question,  though  not  then  in  common 
use.  For  in  his  Apology,  chap.  xxi.  he  says,  that 
the  X0709  is  de  Spiritu  Spiritus,  et  de  Deo  Deus^ : 
Modulo  alter,  non  numero.  '  Spirit  of  Spirit,  and 
'  God  of  God  :  another  in  mode  but  not  in  number.' 
The  same  expression  of  modulo  alius  ah  alio  is  also 
in  the  book  against  Praxeas,  chap,  ix.^  and  to  the 
same  purpose,  chap.  xiv. 

It  is  therefore  plain,  that  Tertullian  thought  that 
in  some  sense  the  Father,  Son,  and  Holy  Spirit  are 
numerically  one :  which  must  be  in  respect  of  the 
substance ;  for  as  for  the  persons,  the  design  of  his 
whole  book  against  Praxeas  is  to  maintain  that  they 
are  three  in  number. 

k   [P.  20.  A.  edit.  Priorii.]  1  [P.  504.  D.] 


Numerical  Unity  of  Essence  in  the  Trinity.         155 

XT.  Mr.  Le  Clerc  does   also  endeavour  to  make  chap.v 
his   advantao^e   of  Greofory  Nazianzen,   with   whom  Z      T~ 

o  o      J  '  Y  ear  after 

Curcellaeus  had  not  meddled.  He  pretended  totheapo- 
write  the  Life  of  this  Father  "\  One  may  easily  see 
through  his  pretended  reasons  for  it,  and  perceive 
that  the  design  was  to  represent  him  as  a  tritheist : 
there  are  so  many  sayings  of  his  wrested,  and  some 
false  translated  for  that  purpose.  It  is  true,  that  260. 
Gregory,  in  those  voluminous  disputations  of  his 
against  the  Arians  and  Sabellians,  having  no  adver- 
saries of  the  tritheistical  opinion,  and  not  fearing  to 
be  himself  suspected  of  it,  has  some  expressions  in 
his  arguments  and  explications  unguarded  on  that 
side :  yet  so  as  that  he  still  speaks  with  abhorrence 
of  the  belief  of  three  gods.  And  it  is  a  known  rule 
of  charity,  that  no  consequences  drawn  from  an 
author's  expressions,  are  to  fix  on  him  an  opinion 
contrary  to  his  own  express  declaration :  but  that 
what  he  says  at  one  or  two  places,  seeming  to  favour 
any  opinion,  must  be  explained  by  others,  if  he  have 
any  other  that  are  plain,  full,  and  purposely  written 
to  the  contrary. 

What  Mr.  Le  Clerc  had  produced  from  this 
Father  was  not  answered,  (which  can  no  way  so 
well  be  done,  as  by  translating  his  works  entire ;  a 
thing  useful,  if  the  modern  readers  of  books  had  so 
much  regard  to  antiquity  as  they  ought :  but  such  a 
regard  is  much  lessened  by  such  lives,)  and  therefore 
he  concluded  in  another  piece",  that  Gregory  was 
*  undoubtedly  of  that  opinion :  the  thing  is  so  clear, 
'  it  cannot  be  questioned  by  those  that  have  con- 
'  sidered    it.'      He    mentions    also,    in    the    Critical 

m  Biblioth.  torn.  xix. 

n  Supplement  to  Dr.  Hammond's  Annotations,  preface. 


156  Gregory  Nazianzen  maintains  the 

CHAP.v.  Epistles  I  spoke  of  before,  his  performance  in  proving 
Year  after  tliis  upon  Gregorj.  Yet  of  all  the  passages  produced 
sdes^^""  ^^  t^^^t  Life  to  justify  this  accusation,  this  is  the 
hardest :  that  he  in  a  certain  sermon «  being  busy 
in  shewing  the  unfitness  of  all  those  examples  of 
natural  things  which  are  commonly  made  use  of  to 
explain  the  Trinity,  how  they  are  all  deficient  and 
unapt  in  one  respect  or  another,  says :  that  '  he,  as 
'  well  as  others,  had  thought  of  "  the  vein  of  water 

*  that   feeds  the   spring,  the   spring  or  pond   itself, 

*  and  the  stream  that  issues  from  it."  Whether  the 
'  first  of  these  might  not  be  compared  to  the  Father, 
'  the  second  to  the  Son,  and  the  third  to  the  Holy 
'  Spirit.  But  he  was  afraid  that  by  the  similitude 
'  there  Avould  seem  to  be  represented  something 
'  numerically  one;  for  that  the  vein,  the  spring,  and 
'  the  stream,  are  numerically  one,  though  diversely 
'  modified  or  represented.' 

This  indeed  plainly  shews,  that  Gregory  was 
afraid  of  representing  the  Father,  Son,  and  Holy 
Spirit  as  numerically  one  in  some  sense :  but  how  ? 
As  havinof  an  essence  numerically  one  ?  Not  so  : 
for  he  does  in  one  hundred  places  shew  that  to  be 
his  real  meaning.  But  in  the  Sabellian  sense,  which 
taught  the  persons  to  be  numerically  one,  or,  that 
Father,  Son,  and  Holy  Spirit  are  several  names  of 
one  person :  and  consequently  that  it  may  properly 
be  said  that  the  Father  was  incarnated,  suffered,  &c. 
He  had  the  more  reason  to  be  cautious  of  saying  any 
thing  that  might  seem  to  favour  that  sense,  because 
the  catholics  were  slandered  by  the  Arians  to  hold 
that  opinion. 

o  Orat.  37.  de  Spiritu  Sancto.  [31.  in  edit.  Benedict,  p.  556, 
&c.] 


Numerical  Unity  of  Essence  in  the  Trinity.        1 57 

The  one  hundred  places,  that  I  spoke  of,  might  be  chap. v. 
produced  out  of  Gregory's  works.  But  there  happen  vear  after 
to  be  enough  in  that  very  sermon,  or  oration,  where  ^^^i^J^p"' 
there  is  this  for  one.     He  is  there  answering  those  ^^o. 
that  thought,  that  from  the  confession  of  three  })er- 
sons  in  the  Godhead  would  follow  by  consequence  the 
doctrine  of  three   Gods.     He   answers    thus ;    that 
though  there  be  three  in  whom  the  Godhead  is,  yet 
there  is  in  them  three  but  one  Godhead,  el?  6  Geo?,  ot\ 

IJLLa   GeoTJ^fP'    and    again,    ajuepicrroii    ev   jue/uLepia-jULeuoi^   r] 

GeoT>y?*i.  But  then  he  brings  in  an  exception  which 
they  made  against  this  answer  of  his  ; 

Ohj.  '  But  they  will  say,  that  the  heathens  (such 

*  of  them  as  had  the  most  advanced  philosophy)  held 
'  that  there  is  but  one  Godhead.     And  also  in  the 

*  case  of  men,  all  mankind  has  but  one  common 
'  nature.  And  yet  the  heathens  had  many  gods,  not 
'  one  only :  and  also  there  are  many  men.' 

This  objection  comes  home  to  the  point.  And 
here  it  is  that  Gregory  must  declare,  whether  he 
hold  a  specific  or  a  numerical  unity.  Therefore  ob- 
serve how  he  answers.  To  the  case  of  the  heathen 
gods  he  makes  a  separate  answer,  that  concerns  not 
this  question.  But  to  that  of  mankind  having  one 
common  nature,  and  yet  being  many  men,  he  an- 
swers thus  : 

Sol.   '  But  here   [viz.  in   the    case   of   men]    the 

*  several  men  have  no  other  unity  than  what  is  made 
'  by  the  conception  of  our  mind,'  to  ev  e^ei  fxovov  e-n-i- 
vo'ia  OecoptjTov^.  He  goes  on  a  while  to  shew  that  men 
do  in  reality  differ  from  one  another;  and  answers 
to  the  objection  about  the  heathen  gods :  and  then 

P  [Orat.  31.  §.  14.]  n  [Ibid.  §.15.] 


158  Gregory  Nazianzeri  maintains  the 

CHAP.  V.  adds,    TO    Se   rifixeTepov    ov    toiovtou,  ovoe   avTrj   juep)^  Tw 

Year  after  'Ia/cto/3,    (pri(Tiv   6    ejULos  deoXoyo?.      'AXAa  TO   ev  eKacTTOv 

tlie  apo-  i'nv  \v  /  '-?  i>^f^'. 

sties  avTOdv  e-^ei  ttjOo?  to  a-vyKeijuevou  ov^  tjTTOv  tj  7rpo9  eavTo  . 

Tw  TUUTw  T>]^  overlap  KaL  Tijg  Svvafxecog^.     '  But  OLir  Deity 

'  [or  God]  is  not  so  :  nor  is  the  portion  of  Jacob  like 
*  them,  as  our  Theologue  [meaning  Jeremy,  x.  16.] 
'  says :  but  every  one  of  them  [the  persons  of  the 
'  Trinity]  has  an  unity  with  the  other,  no  less  than 
'  that  which  he  has  with  himself,  by  reason  of  the 
'  identity  of  essence  and  power.' 

It  is  impossible  any  thing  should  be  fuller  to  the 
purpose  than  this.  For  the  proper  difference  be- 
tween a  numerical  and  a  specifical  unity,  is  this ; 
that  a  specifical  unity  is  only  by  our  conception  : 
and  the  numerical  unity  is  the  only  real  unity.  In 
the  several  men  that  differ  in  age,  in  shape,  &c. 
there  is  something  alike,  viz.  the  essence  or  nature 
of  man.  This  our  mind  abstracts  from  the  rest, 
and  conceives  it  as  one  in  them  all.  But  this  com- 
mon nature,  so  abstracted  from  the  individuals,  sub- 
sists only  in  our  mind  :  and  in  reality  every  man 
has  his  own  essence  distinct  in  number  from  the 
rest :  and  if  all  other  men  were  destroyed,  he  would 
have  his  own  essence  just  as  he  has  it  now.  And 
that  which  Gregory  answers  is,  that  several  men 
have  no  other  unity  or  sameness  than  what  is  by 
the  conception  of  our  mind,  i.  e.  no  other  than  a 
specifical  unity.  But  each  of  the  three,  viz.  Father, 
Son,  and  Holy  Spirit,  has  an  unity  with  the  other, 
as  much  as  with  himself;  by  identity  [or  sameness] 
of  essence  and  of  power,  which  must  be  a  numerical 
one. 

Mr.  Le  Clerc   does   indeed   recite  some   of   this 

r  [Orat.  3i.§.  i6.] 


Numerical  Unity  of  Essence  in  the  Trinity.        159 

answer,  but  in  such  a  fashion,  as  shews  he  had  a  mind  chap.  v. 
to  mar  it  in  the  reciting.     And  the  like  he  does  in  vear  after 
several  other  passages  of  Gregory.     In  the  foremen-  stie>f ^°' 
tioned  comparison  of  the  three  persons  to  the  vein, 
the  pond,  and  the  stream,  because  the  Greek  word 
used  by  Gregory  for  the  vein  is  6(p6a\iuLog,  he  trans- 
lates it,  roeil,  '  an  eye.' 

Who  ever  w^ent  about  to  represent  the  Trinity  by 
an  eye,  a  fountain,  and  a  stream  ?  So  great  a  critic 
should  not  have  been  ignorant  that  it  signifies  there 
(as  Elias  Cretensis  in  his  comments  on  the  place 
had  noted)  the  vein  that  feeds  the  pond,  or  the  hole 
or  opening  of  that  vein  into  the  pond.  And  this 
yet  is  not  so  absurd,  as  where  a  little  after  the 
same  words  are  translated  ;  '  an  eye,' '  a  fountain,'  and 
'  the  sun.'  There  are  a  great  many  other  places  in 
that  Life,  where  Gregory  is  made,  by  curtailing  or 
altering  his  words,  to  speak  nonsense  :  and  I  wish 
the  main  design  of  it  were  not  to  make  him  speak 
something  that  is  by  many  degrees  worse.  For  to 
hold  three  Gods  is  not  to  be  a  Christian,  nor  any 
worshipper  of  Jehovah,  but  a  pagan. 

The  very  same'  oration  furnishes  us  with  several 
more  proofs  of  the  contrary.     A  little  after  the  fore- 
mentioned  passage,  he  quotes  and  approves  of  a  rule 
of  Christian  worship  given  by  his  namesake  Gregory  154- 
Thaumaturgus,  (or  else  by  St.  Basil,  for  the  words 

are  ambiguous,)  o-e^eiv  Oeov  toi^  Harepa,  Qeou  tov  viov, 
Seov  TO  Tluevfxa  ayiov'  rpel?  iSioTrjTai^f  QeoTrjra  juiav^. 
'  That  we  are  to  worship  God  the  Father,  God  the 
'  Son,  and  God  the  Holy  Spirit ;  three  properties, 
'  one  Divinity.' 

And  at  another  place  in  the  same  oration  ;  '  The 

s  [Ibid.  sect.  28.] 


Ib'O  Gregory  Nazianzen's  Opinions. 

CHAP.v.  '  three  are  one  in  the  Godhead  [or  essence],  and  the 

Year  after  '  ouo  three  in   properties  [or  persons]  :    that  there 

sties^^"'     '  ^"^^y   ^®   neither  one  in  the  Sabellian  sense ;   nor 

'  three  in  that  wicked  sense  now  set  up,'  viz.  the 

Arian. 

I  desire  the  reader  to  compare  the  account  of  this 
oration  or  sermon,  which  he  will  conceive  by  these 
passages,  with  the  account  given  by  Mr.  Le  Clerc  of 
the  same  oration  :  and  if  he  doubt  which  is  the 
truest,  to  read  the  oration  itself,  and  some  other  of 
the  same  Father's  works  ;  and  so  pass  his  judgment. 
This  may  be  sooner  done,  than  to  read  the  squab- 
bles pro  and  contra  about  them.  And  indeed  if 
people  would  choose  to  read  the  Fathers  and  an- 
cient writers  themselves,  rather  than  scraps  and 
quotations  out  of  them;  it  were  the  only  way  to 
defeat  the  purpose  of  those,  that  would  defeat  us  of 
that  strength  and  corroboration  of  the  Christian 
religion,  which  accrues  by  the  constant  succession 
of  its  fundamental  doctrines  in  all  ages. 

I  will  mention  but  one  passage  more  of  Gregory, 
and  that  out  of  his  oration  concerning  baptism'', 
out  of  wliicli  I  recited  before  what  properly  con- 
cerns baptism  :  but  he  there  speaking  of  the  Father, 
Son,  and  Holy  Spirit,  in  whose  name  they  were  to 
be  baptized,  explains  their  way  of  subsisting  in  the 
Godhead,  so  as  any  one  will  perceive  he  means  a 
numerical  unity  of  the  essence.  Always  provided 
that  we  make  allowance  for  this ;  that  they  had  not, 
as  I  said,  any  such  settled  use  of  words  of  a  deter- 
minate meaning,  specifical^  numerical^  &c.,  as  we 
use  now :  but  expressed  their  sense  by  paraphrasing 
as  well  as  they  could.     But  you  will   see  that  he 

r  Orat.  40. 


Heresies  about  the  Trinity.  Igj 

means,  that  thougli   tliey  are  in  some  sense  three  chapv 

yet  that  their  essence,  or  nature,  is   one,  and  that.T;;;;^ 

numerically  one:  not  three  natures  or  essences  alP^-P" 

alike,   (as    three    men    have,)   but    one   in   number  '"" 

'  They  are  each  of  them  God  as  considered  sino-W 

*  viz.   the    Father,  the    Son,  and    the    Holy  Spfrit' 

^'  each  having  his  property:  but  the  three  together 

'  are  God,  when  considered  conjunctly.     The  first  of 

'  which  sayings  is  true,  because  of  consubstantiality. 

'  the    other   because   of  the   monarchy    [or   unity]' 

'  I  no  sooner  go  to  think  of  one,  but  I  am  in  my 

'  mind    surrounded   with    the    three    shining   round 

'  about  me.     I  no  sooner  go  to  think  distinctly  of 

'  the  three,  but  I  am  carried  back  to  the  unity  [or 

'  to  consider  them  as  one].     When  I  am  thinkino- 

'  of  one  of  the  three,  I  conceive  him  as  the  whole"^ 

'  and  my  mind  has  no  room  for  any  thino-  else  •  I 

'  find  myself  unable  to  comprehend  'the  greatness"  of 

*  him,  so  as  to  leave  any  thing  for  the  other.    When 

*  1  think  of  the  three  together,  I  see  them  as  one 
lamp,  whose  compacted  light  cannot  be  divided  or 

*  measured.' 

XII.  People's  ineaning  about  a  doctrine  is  never 
better  perceived,  than  by  observing  in  some  dispute 
about  It  how,  and  with  what  reasons,  one  side  attacks, 
and  how  the  other  answers.  Let  us  therefore  observe 
in  some  heresies  that  were  about  the  doctrine  of  the 
Irinity,  what  arguments  the  sectaries  used,  and  which 
way  the  churchmen  answered.  It  will  appear  that  the 
doc  rine  of  the  church  was  such  an  unity  of  essence 
in  the  Divme  persons,  as  we  call  7iumericrd. 

I  shall  mention  one  heresy  before  the  council  of 
A^ice,  and  one  after  it;  because  the  pretence  is  for 
the  time  of  that  council,  and  for  some  time  before 

WALL,  VOL.  II.  jj 


162  Heresies  about  the  Trinity. 

CHAP.v.  and  after  it,  that  the  Christians  held  the  persons 
Year  after  in  the  Trinity  to  be  so  many  different  beings,  and 
sties*^"'  *^  ^®  ^^®  i^  essence  no  otherwise  than  '  as  three 
'  men  have  the  same  common  nature  among  them.' 
If  this  were  true,  then  farewell  Fathers,  and  the 
church  of  Christ  for  all  that  time.  For  this  would 
never  justify  them  from  an  imputation  of  tritheism. 
But  the  contrary,  God  be  thanked,  has  been  fully 
shewn,  both  by  bishop  Stillingfleet,  as  I  said,  and  by 
many  other  learned  men :  and  needs  no  shewing  to 
any  one  that  will  read  the  books  themselves. 

1.  The  first  notable  heresy  that  rose  about  the 
doctrine  of  the  Trinity,  was  that  of  Praxeas,  against 
which  Tertulhan  wrote  the  book  we  spoke  of:  and 
it  was  after  his  time  carried  on  by  Noetus  and 
J^°]  Sabellius,  from  the  year  200  to  260:  after  which 
time  the  men  of  that  sect  were  called  Sabellians. 
They  held,  that  there  is  but  one  person  in  the 
Godhead,  as  I  said.  And  this  they  pretended  not 
to  be  any  new  doctrine  set  up  by  them,  (for  they 
and  all  people  at  that  time  owned  this  for  a  certain 
rule,  as  it  undoubtedly  is ;  that  '  whatsoever  is  new 
'  in  the  fundamentals  of  reHgion,  is  false,')  but  they 
maintained  stiffly  that  it  was  the  very  sense  of  the 
Christian  church  before  them.  Now  I  say,  that 
these  men  could  never  have  so  far  mistaken  the 
church's  sense,  as  to  assert  one  person  in  number ; 
unless  the  general  doctrine  had  owned  that  there  is 
but  one  essence  in  number.  For  if  the  church  had 
held,  that  Father,  Son,  and  Holy  Spirit  had  each  a 
distinct  numerical  essence,  as  three  men  have ;  the 
Sabellians  could  never  have  run  into  that  mistake  of 
the  church's  meaning,  as  to  think  it  to  be,  that  there 
is  but  one  person,  and  consequently  that  the  Father 


The  Catholics  accused  of  Sabellianism.  163 

suffered  ;  which  they  did,  and  were  therefore  called  chap.\\ 


Patripassians.  And  on  the  other  side,  the  church  Year  after 
would  have  had  no  difficulty  in  answering  the  ob- sties. 
jections  of  the  Sabellians ;  who  argued,  that  since 
there  is  but  one  God,  there  can  be  but  one  person  in 
the  Godhead.  For  if  the  church  had  held,  as  before, 
that  the  three  persons  have  only  the  same  specific  or 
common  essence,  and  not  the  same  numerical  essence; 
it  had  been  no  more  a  mystery  that  the  Son  should 
take  flesh,  and  the  Father  not ;  than  it  is  that  of 
three  men,  that  have  all  the  same  common  nature 
of  man,  one  should  do  or  suffer  any  thing,  and  the 
other  not.  And  they  could  not  have  avoided  answer- 
ing so.  Whereas,  on  the  contrary,  the  Fathers  find 
it  a  very  operose  and  difficult  thing  to  answer  the 
objections  of  those  men,  (witness  Tertullian's  book 
against  Praxeas,)  and  do  always  fly  to  the  incom- 
prehensible nature  of  the  Divine  essence. 

And  when  the  Arian  disputes  arose,  the  catholics 
that  maintained  the  clause  of  one  substance  were 
constantly  by  the  Arians  reproached  with  Sabel- 
lianism, i.  e.  of  holding  but  one  person  in  number : 
which  could  not  have  been,  but  that  they  explained 
themselves  so  as  to  shew  that  they  meant  but  one 
substance  in  number.  This  was  the  first  and  main 
ground  of  Arius'  falling  off  from  the  church.  For 
so  Socrates  relates  the  matter". 

'  Alexander  the   bishop,   sitting  on   a   time   with  220. 
'  his  presbyters  and  other  clergy,  discoursed  some- 
'  thing  nicely  of  the  holy  Trinity;  how  there  is  in 
'  the  Trinity  fxava?,  an  unity  [or  singularity].     But 
*  Arius,  one  of  the  presbyters  of  his  church,  a  man 

"   Hist.  lib.  i.  cap.  5. 

m2 


164  The  Catholics  accused  of  SaheUianism. 

CHAP.v.  *  not  unskilful  in  logical  quirks,  thinking  that  the 

Year  after  '  bisliop   did  sot  up  the  doctriue  of  Sabellius,  did 

sties!^*'"      '  himself,   out    of  contention,    set    up    the    directly 

'  opposite  extreme  to  that  of  that  Libyan.' 

230.      And  a  little  after  that  the  council  of  Nice  had 

inserted  into  the  creed  that  phrase,  that  the  Son  is 

6/j.oov(Tio?,  '  coessential'   [or  of  one  substance]  with 

the  Father ;  the  same  historian  tells  how  there  were 

great  contests  about  the  import  of  that  word.    And 

he   says,   '  They   that   disliked   that  word,   thought 

'  that  the  approvers  of  it  did  set  up  the  opinion  of 

*  Sabellius  :  and  so   called  them  blasphemers,  as  if 

*  they  had  gone   about    to    take   away  vrrap^iv  the 

*  subsistence  [or  distinct  personality]  of  the  Son  of 
'  God.     And  they,  on  the  contrary,  that  apj^roved 

*  that  term,  reckoned  that  their  opposers  brought 
'  in  polytheism  [or  several  gods]  ^.'  And  Sozomen 
gives  the  very  same  account y. 

This  plainly  shews  that  the  catholics,  who  owned 
the  word  ojuoova-io?,  explained  themselves  so  as  to 
mean  one  substance  in  number.  For  else  the  accu- 
sations ought  to  have  run  quite  contrary :  and  not 
the  deniers  of  that  phrase,  but  the  approvers  of  it, 
would  have  been  accused  of  polytheism,  or  tritheism  : 
as  they  are  now  by  these  men.  But  they  were  then 
upbraided  with  Sabellianism,  the  direct  contrary  ex- 
treme: and  the  defenders  of  the  Nicene  Creed  against 
the  Arians  do  take  most  pains  in  vindicating  them- 
selves from  that  imputation ;  which  could  have  had 
no  appearance,  if  they  had  not  been  understood  to 
hold  one  substance  in  number. 

This  made  them  to  be  accused  of  *  taking  away 

X  Lib.  i.  cap.  23.  y  Lib.  ii.  cap.  18,  19. 


The  Catholics  accused  of  Sabellianism.  165 

*  the  subsistence  [or  distinct  personality]  of  the  Son  chap.  v. 

*  of  God  ;'  because  they  teaching  that  there  is  in  the  Vear  after 
Trinity  but  one  substance  in  all,  and  the  others  sties^'^'^' 
extending  what  they  said  of  ova-ia,  '  substance,'  to 
vTrap^is,  '  subsistence,'  concluded  that  they  thereby 
made  but  '  one  subsistence  in  all ;'  and  so  the  Son 
could  have  none.  Whereas  if  they  had  meant,  as 
these  late  slanderers  represent  their  meaning,  '  three 

'  substances  in  number,'  or  any  thing  that  would 
have  amounted  to  what  that  reviler  calls  '  three 
'  consubstantial  gods  ^ ;'  they  would  have  been  so  far 
from  taking  away  his  vTrap^ig,  that  they  had  given 
him  a  distinct  ova-la,  essence  or  divinity,  and  had 
made  him  a  distinct  God  from  God  the  Father. 

If  there  were  time  to  enter  into  any  of  the  parti-  225. 
culars  of  the  history  of  the  men  of  that  time,  such  260. 
as  Eustathius,  Meletius,  &c.,  and  other  chief  de- 
fenders of  the  Nicene  faith ;  that  would  plainly 
shew  the  falsehood  of  this  accusation.  For  if  this 
accusation  were  true,  these  men  would  have  been 
by  the  Arians  hated  and  deposed  under  any  pre- 
tence sooner  than  that  of  Sabellianism :  which,  as 
Socrates  ^  and  Theodoret  ^  tell  us,  was  the  chief 
pretence  against  them. 

2.  Now  to  come  to  some  later  times,  and  the 
heresies  then  arising.  We  shall  see  how  directly 
contrary  to  history  that  opinion  is,  that  pretends 
that  it  was  '  after  the  fifth  century  that  the  doctrine 
'  of  one  individual  essence  was  received.'  For  it 
places  the  beginning  of  the  catholic  religion  in 
opposition  to  tritheism,  just  at  the  time  when  tri- 
theism,  in  opposition  to   the  true  religion,  was  first 

z  Above  at§.  8.  p.  148.  a  Lib.  ii.  cap.  9.  de  Eustathio. 

^  Lib.  ii.  cap.  31.  de  Meletio. 


166  Philoponus  the  first  Tritheist. 

CHAP.  V.  of  all  vented.     For  Joannes  Philoponus,  in  the  sixth 

Year  after  century,  was  the   first  man   of  all  that  owned  the 

sties!''''      Son  and  Holy  Spirit  to  be  God,  that  ever  offered  to 

470.  deny  '  the  doctrine  of  one  individual  essence'  in  the 

Godhead,   and    to    affirm    that    each  person   in  the 

Trinity  had  his  own  essence  or   substance  distinct, 

and  so  that  there  were  three  substances  or  natures 

in  number  as  well  as  three  persons. 

The  quotations  concerning  him,  and  concerning 
his  being  condemned  for  this  doctrine,  might  be 
easily  produced,  being  a  piece  of  history  so  well 
known  and  uncontro verted.  It  is  only  to  spare 
time  (having  too  far  digressed  already)  that  I  de- 
sire the  reader  to  take  the  account  of  his  heresy  in 
the  words  of  the  learned  Dr.  Cave  ^,  who  giving  a 
short  account  of  him  (as  he  does  of  all  other  writ- 
ers) relates  the  ordinary  history  concerning  him 
thus  :  '  He  vented  several  doctrines  contrary  to  the 
'  faith.  Having  taken  for  granted  from  Aristotle's 
'  philosophy,  of  which  he  had  been  a  great  student, 
'  that  hypostasis  is  the  same  with  natura,  he  thence 
'  concluded  that  there  is  but  one  nature  in  Christ : 
'  and  rejected  the  council  of  Chalcedon.  And  after- 
'  ward,  when   the    catholics    objected   to    him    that 

*  there  are  in  the  Trinity  three  hypostases,  and  yet 
'  but  one  nature  ;  to  get  clear  of  that  objection,  he 
'  ventured  to  maintain  that  there  are  three  natures 
'  or    substances  in  the  Trinity :    yet  still  positively 

*  denying  that  there  are  three  Gods,  or  deities.  He 
'  was  for  this  reason  accounted,  and  is  to  this  day 
'  accounted,  the  author  and  ringleader  of  the  sect  of 
'  the  tritheists.' 

The  Socinians  themselves,  when  they  think  it  for 
c  Hist.  Literaria,  part.  i.  verb.  Joannes  Philoponus. 


Philoponus  the  first  Tritheht.  167 

their  purpose,  do  instance  in   the  condemnation  of  chap.  v. 
this  man ;  saying  of  an  opinion  which  they   would  Year  after 
represent  the  same  as  this,  that  '  it  was  condemned  Ji^.^'P"" 
'  by  the  ancients  in  the  person  of  Philoponus ;  and 
'  in  the  middle  ages,  in  the  person  and  writings  of 
'  abbot  Joachim  d,'  &c.  And  can  there  be  any  thing 
fouler  than  to  impute  to  the  ancients  an  opinion, 
which    they    condemned    as    soon   as  they  heard  it 
vented?    Would    they  have    condemned    him    for 
expressing  that  which  was  their  own  meaning  ? 

All  that  has  any  appearance  of  truth  in  this 
accusation  of  the  Fathers,  is  this ;  first,  that  they 
being  used  to  a  style  that  is  fitter  for  an  honest 
plain  man  to  signify  his  meaning,  than  for  a  lo- 
gician to  hold  a  dispute  in,  and  yet  being  forced 
to  speak  much  of  the  Trinity,  do  many  times  ex- 
press themselves  so,  and  use  such  comparisons,  peri- 
phrases, &c.,  as  a  captious  man  may  take  his  advan- 
tage of,  if  he  will  single  out  some  particular  places : 
and  secondly,  that  their  disputes  being  against 
Arians,  Eunomians,  &c.,  who  not  only  denied  the 
numerical  unity,  but  even  the  specifical  unity  or 
equality  of  essence  in  the  Trinity,  do  sometimes 
use  such  arguments  as  prove  a  specifical  unity ;  not 

d  Considerations  on  the  Explication  of  the  Doctrine  of  the 
Trinity,  p.  12.  [The  tract  here  quoted  was  written  against  the 
explications  by  doctors  Wallis,  Sherlock,  South,  Cudworth, 
and  Mr.  Hooker;  it  is  addressed  'to  a  person  of  quality,'  and 
printed  in  1693.  4to.  pp.35.  There  is  a  second  piece,  by  the 
same  author,  and  bearing  precisely  the  same  title,  but  directed 
against  the  archbishop  of  Canterbury,  the  bishops  of  Worcester 
and  Sarum,  and  some  others,  addressed  '  in  a  letter  to  H.  H.' 
and  pubhshed  in  the  following  year,  1694;  4to.  pp.  68.  The 
similarity  of  the  two  titles  has  made  it  necessary  to  insert  this 
note.] 


168  Philoponus  the  first  Tritheist. 

CHAP.  V.  that  that  was  all  they  would  have  ;  but  to  overthrow 
;:^       ~  one  error  first.     And   on  this  head  they  sometimes 

\  ear  after  *' 

the  apo-      uge  the  instance  of  three  men  beino-  6ixoov<tlol  '  of  one 

sties. 

*  substance :'  such  is  that  place  of  Gregory  Nyssen 
which  Curcellseus  urges,  and  bishop  Stillingfleet 
confesses  to  be  the  hardest  place  in  all  antiquity. 
But  in  such  places  their  aim  is  to  argue  thus ;  if 
three  men,  though  differing  as  three  individuals, 
yet  having  all  the  same  sort  of  essence,  are  in  some 
sense  styled  '  of  one  substance  with  one  another ;' 
how  much  more  may  the  Father,  Son,  and  Holy 
Spirit  be  so  styled,  who  do  not  differ  as  three  men, 
but  have  an  essence  that  is  aTimtjTo?,  afxepia-rog,  '  un- 
'  parted,  undistinguished  ;'  and  that  is  a-^^wpla-rw'i  koi 
a§iaipeTW9,  '  inseparably  and  indivisibly,'  one  and  the 
same  in  them  all  ?  They  used  these  last  words  to 
express  that  which  we  now  express  by  '  numerically 
'  one  ;'  or  '  one  in  number.'  And  they  thought  these 
words  did  it  more  effectually ;  because  a  thing  may 
be  one  in  number,  (as  there  is  but  one  world  in 
number,)  and  yet  not  uncompounded,  indivisible,  &c. 
as  God's  essence  is.  In  a  word,  to  say  that  they 
sometimes  used  the  instances  of  a  specific  unity,  is 
true  :  but  to  say  that  they  pleaded  for  no  more  than 
that  in  the  Trinity,  is  false. 

XIII.  These  answers  and  defences  are  necessary 
only  in  the  case  of  those  Fathers,  whose  style  is 
more  loose  and  Asiatic,  and  so  their  words  more 
capable  of  being  perverted  from  their  true  meaning. 
But  other  Fathers,  as  St.  Austin,  St.  Hierome,  St. 
Ambrose,  &c.  who  lived  at  the  same  time,  and  held 
the  same  faith  and  communion,  being  brought  up 
to  some  use  of  logic,  have  placed  their  words  con- 
cerning  the  numerical  unity,  so  as   that  no  file  or 


Socinians  vilify  the  Fathers.  169 

tooth    can    touch    them.      This   bishop  Stillingfleet  chap. v. 

has  shewn  of  St.  Austin  :  and  it  is  proved  incontest-  y^ai-  after 

ably   by  these  words  of  his,  lib.  vii.  dc  Tri?iitatc^,^^^^P^' 

c.  4.  '  If  the  word  essence  were  a  specific  name  com- 

'  mon  to  the  three,  M'hy  might  there  not  be  said  to 

'  be  three  essences  ;  as  iVbraham,  Isaac,  and  Jacob 

'  are    three    men,   the   word    man    being    a  specific 

'  name  common  to  all  men  V    And  a  little   after ; 

'  Quia   hoc  illi  est  Deum  esse,  quod  est  esse,  tam 

'  tres    essentias   quam   tres   Deos  dici  fas   non   est.' 

'  Since  with  him  it  is  the  same  thing  to  be  God,  as 

'  it  is  to  be  ;  we  must  no  more  say  three  essences 

'  [or  beings]  than  three  Gods.'     St.  Hierome  cannot 

well  speak  more  home  than  he   does   in  the  place 

I  quoted  on  another  occasion  \  '  If  any  one,  by  hypo- 

'  stasis  meaning  essence,  does  not  confess  that  there 

'  is   but  one  hypostasis  in  three  persons,  he  is  es- 

'  tranged    from  Christ.'     And   St.  Ambrose    argues, 

'  How  can  the  unity  of  the  Godhead  admit  of  plu- 

'  rality,  when  plurality  is  of  number,  and  the  Divine 

'  nature  admits  not  of  number^?'  There   would  be 

no  end  of  repeating  the  sayings  of  these  and  other 

Fathers,  that  are  full  and  home  to  this  purpose. 

XIV.  What  then  can  be  done  with  these  Fa- 
thers ?  They  are  pointblank  against  the  Socinians ; 
and  they  cannot  be  made  tritheists,  but  must  be 
owned  to  be  Unitarians  in  respect  of  God's  essence. 
They  must  be  blackened  some  other  way.  As  for 
St.  Hierome,  he  is  proud,  unconstant,  &c.,  and  the 
rest  have  other  faults.  What  shall  be  said  of  St. 
Austin,  whose  piety,  humility,  and  caution  in  writing, 

e  [Augustiiii  Opera,  torn.  viii.  p.  853.  860.  edit.  Benedict.] 

f  Ch.  iii.  sect.  10.  §.  i . 

iC  Lib.  iii.  de  Spiritu  Sancto,  c.  13.   [Op.  torn.  ii.p.  684.] 


170  Socinians  vilify  the  Fathers. 

CHAP.v.  has  obtained  a  great  repute?  Set  Mr.  Le  Clerc 
Year  after  upoii  him  I  he  will  prove  him  to  be  '  one  that  has 
sties^^°  '  promoted  some  two  doctrines,  which  have  taken 
'  away  all  goodness  and  justice  both  from  God  and 
'  men^,'  and  will  find  a  way  to  lay  the  odium  of 
that  tyranny  with  which  the  French  king  perse- 
cutes his  protestant  subjects,  at  his  door.  Upon 
what  grounds  ?  Because  he  held  the  doctrine  of 
prsedestination,  an  inextricable  point,  in  which  good 
men  in  all  ages  have  differed  :  and  because  he  was 
convinced  by  the  unquiet  and  contentious  humour 
of  the  Donatists  and  Circumcellions,  and  by  the 
good  effect  which  the  emperor's  edicts  afterward 
had  upon  them,  that  moderate  penalties  inflicted  on 
turbulent  schismatics  are  useful. 

It  is  not  only  the  Christians  at  the  time  of  the 
council  of  Nice,  and  near  before  or  after  it,  that 
have  incurred  the  displeasure  of  these  men,  by  their 
branding  the  Paulianists  in  the  manner  I  men- 
tioned :  it  is  all  the  ancients  of  whom  we  have  any 
remains.  Socrates^  tells,  how  Sabinus,  a  writer  of 
the  Macedonian  sect,  (these  were  akin  to  the  Pauli- 
anists,) found  it  for  his  purpose  to  cast  dirt  on  the 
Fathers  of  the  Nicene  council,  making  them  a  pack 
of  ignorant  and  silly  men.  Yet  he  left  a  handle 
whereby  himself  might  be  refuted :  for  he  had  ac- 
knowledged (as  he  durst  not  deny)  that  Eusebius 
was  a  man  of  great  judgment  and  learning.  Socra- 
tes, by  producing  Eusebius'  testimony'*  in  com- 
mendation of  the  rest,  rebukes  the  falsehood  of  that 
slanderer.  But  these  have  taken  a  more  effectual 
course  :  they  have  put  them  all  into  the  indictment, 

h  Supplement  to  Dr,  Hammond's  Annotations,  Preface. 

'  Lib.  i.  cap.  8.  ^  De  Vita  Constantini,  lib.  iii.  cap.  9. 


The  Mischief  accruing  to  Religion^  c^-c.  171 

not  leaving  us  one  by  whose  evidence  we  might  chap. v. 
retrieve  the  credit  of  the  rest.  The  reason  is  ;  they  Year  after 
can  find  never  a  Paulianist  among  them.  *«  ^p°" 

The  apostles  chose  the  best  men  they  could  find, 
to  succeed  them  in  the  ministry :  such  as  Timothy, 
Titus,  Polycarp,  &c.  They  also  gave  them  this 
charge ;  The  tilings  ivkich  ye  have  heard  of  us  be- 
fore many  ivitnesses,  the  same  commit  ye  to  faith- 
ful men^  tvho  may  he  fit  to  teach  others  also^. 
They  knew  how  much  it  concerned  the  good  of  the 
church,  and  the  credibility  of  the  doctrine  in  future 
times,  to  have  it  handed  down  by  faithful,  prudent, 
and  judicious  men.  We  have  all  the  reason  in  the 
world  to  believe  (unless  the  contrary  could  be 
proved)  that  this  charge  was  obeyed  by  their  depu- 
ties ;  and  that  the  succession  was  for  the  first  ages 
generally  carried  on  in  good  hands.  This  race  of 
men  would  persuade  us  the  contrary :  for  they  spare 
not  any  that  are  left  of  those  that  were  nigh  the 
apostles.  Take  Irenaeus  for  example.  He  received  67. 
the  doctrine  from  Polycarp,  who  was  chosen  by 
St.  John.  He  has  left  some  books  against  the  here- 
sies that  were  then,  and  some  other  pieces.  These 
were  much  valued  by  the  men  of  the  next  ages. 
They  call  him  the  mauler  of  heresies  and  false 
doctrines,  a  skilful  conveyer  of  the  history  and  tra- 
ditions of  the  church.  We  ])ick  out  of  his  works 
the  completest  catalogue  by  far  of  the  books  of  the 
New  Testament,  of  any  that  is  so  ancient.  Yet  in 
so  large  writings  he  has  here  and  there  (as  it  hap- 
pens to  a  man)  some  sayings  and  sentences  of  small 
force  or  weight ;  some  particular  observations  of 
little    moment,    some    arguings    weak,    and     some 

1  2  Tim.  ii.  2. 


172  The  Mischief  accruing  to  Religion 

CHAP.v.  mistaken.    These  they  cull  out,  would  have  us  judge 
Year  after  ^^  ^^^®  whole    garden  by  these  flowers ;    that  they 
theapo-      Yuny  represent   the   man   a  silly  and  credulous  fop, 
and  his  works  not  worth  the  pains  of  reading. 

Next  to  the  undervaluing  the  authority  of  the 
Scripture,  there  is  no  so  mischievous  way  to  under- 
mine the  Christian  religion,  as  thus  to  vilify  the 
ancient  professors  of  it.  For  it  is  they  that  have 
handed  down  the  Scripture,  and  the  interpretation 
and  confirmation  thereof  to  us.  It  is  from  them 
that  we  know  which  books  are  canonical,  or  were 
truly  the  wTitings  of  such  or  such  an  apostle.  One 
of  the  assurances  that  we  have  that  the  miracles 
recorded  were  really  wrought,  is,  that  they  who 
lived  so  near  the  time  that  they  might  easily  in- 
quire, did  believe,  and  were  really  convinced  of  the 
matter  of  fact.  And  the  more  injudicious  they  are 
represented  to  be,  the  weaker  that  argument  is. 
Therefore  though  we  know  them  to  be  but  men, 
and  liable  to  mistakes,  yet  it  is  an  unnatural  im- 
piety to  make  it  one's  business  to  represent  them 
w^orse  than  they  are. 

But  as  their  credit  has  held  now  so  many  hun- 
dred years  in  all  the  Christian  world,  when  all  the 
books  of  those  that  have  nibbled  at  them  have  been 
slighted  and  forgotten  :  so  the  attempts  made  by 
these  men  are  too  void  of  strength  and  truth,  to 
give  us  any  reason  to  fear  that  they  should  over- 
throw it.  It  is  a  poor  piece  of  spite  to  set  one's 
self  to  be  revenged  on  the  credit  of  men  dead  1300 
or  1500  years  since,  because  their  words  will  not  be 
brought  to  favour  some  alteration  of  the  Christian 
faith  that  we  would  set  up.  And  it  is  also  an  im- 
pious thing  to  be  so  far  in  love  with  such  an  altera- 


hy  oilifying  the  Primitive  Church.  173 

tion,  as  to  go  about  to  build  it  upon  the  ruins  of  the  chap.v" 
credit  of  Christianity  in  general.     For  what  an  ill  year  after 
face  does  this  put  upon  the  Christian  faith,  to  main- **^  ^i^°' 
tain  that  it  has  been  conveyed  down   to    us  by  a 
church   made  up   of  silly  and   credulous   men,  and 
such  as  believed  there  were  three  Gods. 

XV.  After  I  had  finished  this  chapter,  there 
came  over  another  book  from  Holland,  written  by 
the  same  spiteful  enemy  of  the  Fathers,  whose  cavils 
against  them  I  have  been  here  answering :  where 
he  brings  in  St.  Austin  also  among  the  tritheists. 
He  could  not  have  taken  a  more  effectual  course  to 
hinder  any  body  from  believing  his  slanders  of  the 
other  Fathers.  He  calls  his  book  Bibliotheque 
Choisie,  intending  it  for  a  continuation  of  his  Bib- 
liotheque Universelle.  And  himself  he  styles  here 
John  Phereponus,  that  is,  '  One  that  takes  a  great 

*  deal  of  pains'  (to  do  mischief). 

First,  he  labours  by  all  ways  to  vilify  St.  Austin? 
as  one  that  was  no  such  linguist  as  Phereponus  is : 
'  He  understood   (he   says,  tom.  i.  p.  406.)   neither 

*  Greek  nor  Hebrew.    He  was  not  fit  to  expound  the 

*  Scripture.  His  reasonings  popular,  such  as  might 
'  please  the  Numidians,  and  other  Africans,  who  Avere 
'  of  all  nations  the  most  ignorant  and  most  corrupt.' 
This  he  says,  though  he  knew  that  St.  Austin  was, 
not  only  for  his  preachings,  but  writings,  the  most 
celebrated  bishop,  (as  St.  Hierome  says,)  not  only 
in  Africa,  but  in  the  whole  world.  But  he  says, 
(p.  407.)  '  The  churchmen  of  this  age  were  hardly 
'  any  better  in  the  other  provinces  of  the  Roman 
^  empire.'  The  question,  whether  one  that  under- 
stands not  Hebrew  nor  Greek  (which  yet  is  not 
altogether  true  of  St.  Austin)  may  not  for  all  that 


174  The  Mischief  accruing  to  Religion 

CHAP.v.  be  fit  to  expound  the  Scripture,  we  will  let  pass : 

Year  after  but  tliis  is  Certain,  that  one  that  does  not  believe 

sties^^"'     *^®    divinity   of  our  Saviour   Christ,   is    not  fit    to 

write  harmonies,  annotations,  or  paraphrases  on  it, 

nor   translations    of   it.     And    all    that   abhor  that 

heresy  will  be  careful  how  they  read  them. 

He  proceeds  (p.  410.)  to  say,  without  any  proof 
there  given,  '  that  St.  Austin,  as  well  as  the  other 
'  Fathers,  has  followed  the  doctrine  of  that  time, 
'  which  established  a  specific  unity  between  the 
'  Father,  Son,  and  Holy  Spirit,  and  a  distinction 
'  of  the  numerical  essence :  so  that,  speaking  pro- 
'  perly,  they  believed  three  essences  perfectly  equal, 
'  and  strictly  united  in  will :'  (which  very  mention 
of  three  essences  is  what  St.  Austin  spoke  of  with 
abhorrence  in  the  words  I  quoted  just  now.)  Then 
having  mentioned  a  book  written  against  himself 
by  the  abbot  Faydit"\  intitled ;  '  A  Defence  of  the 

*  Doctrine  of  the  Fathers  concerning  the  Trinity, 
'  against  the  Tropolatres  and  Socinians;  or  the  two 

*  new  Heresies  of  Steven  Nye  and  John  Le  Clerc, 
'  Protestants :'  he  answers  that  he  '  holds  no   he- 

*  resy :'  he  '  does  not  approve  of  the  tri theism  of 
'  the   Fathers,'    &c.     And    if  it    be    said    that    the 

*  Fathers  were  not  tritheists,'  then  he  refers  to  the 
authors  he  uses  to  do ;  Petavius,  Curcellaeus,  Cud- 
worth,  (as  if  they  had  not  been  answered,)  and  to 
the  piece  that  I  mentioned,   [the  Life  of  Gregory 

m  [See  '  Apologie  du  systeme  des  SS.  Peres  sur  la  Trinite, 
centre  les  Tropolatres  et  les  Sociniens,  ou  les  deux  nouvelles 
heresies  d'Etienne  Nye  et  Jean  le  Clerc,  Protestans,  refut^es 
dans  la  response  de  I'abbe  Faydit  au  livre  du  R.  P.  Hugo,'  &c. 
1  2mo.  a  Nancy,  1702.  S.  Nye's  work  is  entitled,  '  The  Doctrine 
'  of  the  Holy  Trinity,'  &c.  8vo.  London,  1701.] 


hy  vilifying  the  Primitive  Church.  175 

Nazianzen,]  written  by  himself.     Where  does  this  chap.  v. 
man  think  the  catholic  church  was  at  that  time  ?  Year  after 
For  he  not  only  makes  the  Fathers  to  be  heretics,  ^.^^  ^'^'^• 
(and  tritheists,  which  is  indeed  to  be  pagans,)  but 
calls  it  also  '  the  doctrine  of  that  time.' 

But  to  shew  us  from  how  envenomed  a  spirit  all 
this  rises;  and  how  he  employs  himself:  he  tells  us, 
(p.  409,)  that  '  he  has  found  a  way  to  make  a  co- 
'  medy  of  five  acts,  out  of  the  stories  of  certain 
'  miracles  done  at  Hippo,  of  which  St.  Austin  speaks 
'  in  his  32l2d  sermon,  and  the  following.'  Now  the 
things  there  related  by  St.  Austin  are  (if  not  proper 
miracles  in  the  modern  sense  of  the  word,  yet) 
wonderful  and  gracious  providences  of  God ;  which 
the  word  miracula  well  enough  signifies,  and  which 
all  pious  men  think  themselves  bound  to  lay  to 
heart,  and  commemorate,  though  this  man  makes 
a  mock  of  them.  This  advertisement  he  gives,  to 
see,  I  suppose,  whether  this  copy  too  will  yield  any 
money ;  and  whether,  as  he  has  found  booksellers  " 
that  would  stand  out  at  nothing,  so  he  can  find  any 
players  profane  enough  to  act  this  his  comedy.  And 
if  they  be  so  inclined,  it  is  pity  but  they  should 
do  it:  that  they  may  fill  up  the  measure  of  their 
impiety ;  and  that  all  Christian  princes  and  states 
may  follow  the  good  examples  of  the  French  king  in 
exterminating  them,  and  of  the  king  of  Prussia  in 
prohibiting  his  books. 

XVI.  Since  the  first  edition  of  this  book,  Mr,  Le 
Clerc  does,  in  an  encomium  which  he  writes  on  Mr. 
Locke*',  own,  that  he  has  seen  bishop  Stillingfleet's 
'  Vindication    of    the   Trinity.'     And    after   having 

^  [See  above,  vol.  i.  p,  351.] 

o  Biblioth.  Choisie,  torn.  vi.  [p.  393.] 


176  The  Mischief  accruing  to  Religion 

CHAP.v.  passed  a  very  slighting  and  contemptuous  censure 
Vear  after  ^^^  wliat  the  bishop  has  there,  and  in  some  other 
sdes*^*'  pieces,  written  against  Mr.  Locke's  notions,  and  on 
the  other  side,  as  much  magnified  his  hero,  (the 
solidity  of  his  doctrine,  the  exactness  of  his  thought, 
he.  M'hereas  bishop  Stillingfleet  understood  neither 
his  adversary's  meaning,  nor  the  matter  itself,  and 
was  never  used  either  to  think  or  to  speak  with  any 
great  exactness.  See  the  saucy  arrogance  of  this  cri- 
tic :) — he  pretends  at  last  to  be  surprised  to  find  there 
a  confutation  of  Curcella3us'  proofs  of  the  tritheism  of 
the  ancients.  He  had  reason  to  be  surprised,  if  he 
had  not  seen  it  before ;  because  he  had  since  the 
publication  of  it  cast  vile  reproaches  on  all  the  an- 
cient Christians  on  the  credit  of  those  proofs,  which 
he  might  see  here  all  overthrown. 

What  does  he  do  upon  this  surprise?  Does  he 
pretend  to  shew  by  any  particulars,  that  Curcellseus 
had  not  mistaken  the  sense  of  his  own  quotations, 
as  the  bishop  pretended  to  shew  that  he  had  ?  Or, 
if  he  cannot  do  this,  does  he  acknowledge  his  own 
slanders?  Neither  of  these.  But  instead  of  vindi- 
cating those  quotations  from  being  wrested,  he 
throws  in  one  more  of  his  own  to  them,  which  is 
more  apparently  wrested  than  any  of  them.  It  is 
out  of  St.  Hilary  de  Synodis :  '  Which  book,'  he 
says,  '  Mr.  Stillingfleet  had  not  read  very  carefully, 
'  or  else  did  not  remember  distinctly.  For  there  is 
'  hardly  any  book  from  which  one  may  more  plainly 
'  prove  that  the  orthodox  of  that  time  believed  one 
'  God  in  species,  [i.  e.  as  to  the  sort  or  kind  of 
'  Gods,]  but  three  in  number.'  Is  not  this  horrid  ? 
Three  Gods  in  number?  Did  ever  any  Christian 
own  this  ?  Then  he  produces  the  passage. 


hy  vilifying  the  Primitive  Church.  177 

It  must  be   noted  that   St.  Hilary  there,  in  dis-  chap.v. 
puting"  against  the  Arians,  does  labour  to  shew  that  year  after 
the  term  oixooxxrioq^  '  of  one  substance,'  is  the  mosf^Y^^"" 
clear  and    the  most   significative   of  the   catholics' 
meaning ;  but  yet  that  the  term  o(xoio\j(Tio<;^  '  of  like 

*  substance,'  as  also  the  term  '  of  equal  substance,' 
may  be  borne  with  and  admitted,  as  being  capable  of 
being  explained  in  an  orthodox  sense,  and  as  being 
so  explained  and  used  by  many  catholic  writers  : 
viz.  that  in  divinis,  likeness  or  equality,  are  all  one 
with  identity  or  sameness.  Speaking  thus,  '  Si  ergo 
'  [pater]  naturam  neque  aliam  neque  dissimilem  ei 
'  quem    invisibiliterP    [/.  indivisibiliter]    generabat, 

*  dedit  ;    non    potest    aliam    dedisse    nisi   propriam. 

*  Ita  similitude  proprietas  est,  proprietas  sequalitas 
'  est%'  &c.     '  If   then   he    [God   the   Father]    gave 

*  [or  communicated]  to  him  whom  he  without  any 
'  division  begot,  a  nature  which  is  not  another  nor 
'  unlike ;  it  must  be  so,  that  he  gave  him  no  other 
'  than  his  own.  So  likeness,  and  sameness,  [or 
'  ownness,]  and  equality,  are  all  one.'  And  then, 
a  few  words  after,  comes  the  passage  at  which 
Mr.LeClerc  carps;  'Caret  igitur,  fratres,  similitude 
'naturae  contumelise  suspicione ;  nee  potest  videri 
'  Filius  idcirco  in  proprietate  paterniTe  naturae  non 
'  esse,  quia  similis  est :  cum  similitude  nulla  sit, 
'  nisi  ex  sequalitate  naturae  ;  aequalitas  autem  na- 
'  turae  non  potest  esse,  nisi  una  sit ;  una  vero  non 
'  personae  unitate,  sed  Generis  '".'  '  So  that  there  is 
'  no  need,   brethren,  that    you  should   suspect    this 

P   [The  Benedictine  edition  reads  here  impassibiliter.'] 
q   [S.  Hilarius  de   Synodis,    prope  finem.    [sect.  74.   p.  1192, 
edit.  Benedict.] 

'•  [Sect.  76.] 

WALL,  VOL.  II.  N 


178  The  Mischief  accruing  to  Religion 

€HAP.v,  '  phrase,  "  likeness  of  nature,"  of  any  reproachful 
Year  after  '  meaning :  nor  will  the  Son  seem  not  to  have  the 
sties*^^°"  '  Father's  own  nature  for  that  reason,  because  he  is 
'  said  to  be  like  him.  Whereas  there  is  no  likeness 
'  but  by  equality  of  nature,  and  equality  of  nature 
'  cannot  [in  this  case,  speaking  of  divine  nature]  be, 
'  unless  it  be  One.  One,  not  by  unity  of  person,  but 
'  of  Genus.' 

Whereas  Mr.  Le  Clerc  observes  here,  that  sup- 
posing the  numerical  unity  of  the  divine  essence,  it 
is  not  proper  to  say,  the  nature  of  the  Son  is  like  or 
equal  to  that  of  the  Father ;  it  is  true,  if  St.  Hilary 
had  not  explained  himself  so,  as  by  equality  to  mean 
identity.  And  Avhereas  he  observes  that  by  the  word 
genus  St.  Hilary  shews  his  meaning  to  be  of  a  ge- 
nerical  or  specifical  unity  only ;  this  also  would  have 
some  sense  according  to  the  ordinary  use  of  the  word 
qenus.  But  St.  Hilary  had  declared  in  that  very  book 
in  what  sense  he  took  the  word  :  as  at  the  beginning 
of  the  book,  in  these  words ;  '  but  seeing  I  must  often 
'  use  the  words  essence  and  substance,  we  must  know 
'  wdiat  essence  signifies :  lest  we  should  use  words, 
'  and  not  know  the  meaning.  Essence  is  that  which 
'  a  thing  is,'  &c.     '  And  it  may  be  called  the  essence, 

'  or  nature,  or  genus,  or  substance  of  any  thing.' 

And  a  little  after,  '  whereas  therefore  w^e  say,  that 
'  essence  does  signify  the  nature,  or  genus,  or  sub- 
'  stance,'  kc.  And  constantly  afterward  he  uses  those 
words  as  synonymous.  And  accordingly  Erasmus,  in 
the  dedication  of  his  edition  of  St.  Hilary's  works, 
had  said;  '  of  the  same  essence,  or,  as  St. Hilary  often 
'  speaks,  of  the  same  genus  or  nature  with  the  Father, 
'  which  the  Greeks  express  oixoova-iov.'  So  that  to  say, 
Unitate,  non  perso7ice,  sed  generis,  is  to  say,  '  not  one 


by  vilifying  the  Primitive  Gkurch.  179 

*  person,  but  one  substance:'  or  as  he  himself  ex- CHAP.\^ 
presses  it  in  the  page  before,  Non  persona  Deus  y^^^  .  ^. 
imus  est,  sed  natura.     '  God  is  not  one  in  person,  the  apo- 

^  '  sties. 

'  but  in  nature.' 

So  unfair  and  pedantic  a  thing  it  is  to  catch  hold 
of  some  single  phrase  or  expression,  whereby  to 
account  for  an  author's  meaning  through  a  whole 
book.  The  contrary  appears  by  many  passages  in 
the  book.  Particularly  by  this.  He  as  Mell  as  the 
other  Fathers  does  often  say,  that  he  that  should 
preach  that  the  Son,  as  well  as  the  Father,  is  un- 
begotten,  and  without  any  cause,  fountain,  origin, 
or  principle,  [which  the  Greeks  express,  ayewtjrov 
Koi  avap-)(ov,  wibegotten  and  unoviginated,  or  self- 
originated^  would  inevitably  make  two  Gods.  Or, 
'that  God  is  one  by  virtue  of  the  innascibility  :' 
auctoritate  innascibilitatis  Deus  nnus  est.  Because 
though  there  are  three  persons,  yet  One  only  of 
them  is  the  fountain  and  origin  of  the  Deity.  Or, 
as  Tertullian  expresses  it,  *  they  are  all  One,  inas- 
'  much  as  all  are  of  one,  that  is,  as  to  unity  of 
'  the  substance.'    Contra  Praojeam,  cap.  2. 

Now  he  that  speaks  thus,  plainly  denotes  a 
numerical  unity.  For  a  specifical  unity  might  as 
well  or  better  be  conceived  between  three  coordi- 
nate ayevvrjTa  kul  avap-^a :  but  a  numerical  unity 
cannot  be  conceived,  without  conceiving  the  Father 
as  the  fountain  of  the  Deity. 


N  2 


180  Oar  Sa clour  s  Rule^  John  iii.  3,  5. 


CHAP.  VI. 

The  Opinions  of  the  Ancients  concerning  the  future  State  of 
Infants,  or  other  Persons^  that  happen  to  die  unhaptized. 

CHAP. VI.      ^.  I.  THE  account  of  their  opinion  in  this  matter 

Year  after  "^^^^^  ^^  ^^^^  given  in  these  particulars  : 

theapo.  i_  ^\\  i\^Q  ancient   Christians   (without  the  ex- 

stles.  ^ 

ception  of  one  man)  do  understand  that  rule  of 
our  Saviour,  John  iii.  5.  Veril?/,  verily,  I  say  unto 
thee.  Except  a  man  [it  is  in  the  original  eav  ^u]  rl?, 
ea^cept  a  person,  or  except  one']  be  born  of  water 
and  of  the  Spirit,  he  cannot  enter  into  the  kingdom 
of  God ;  of  baptism. 

I  had  occasion  in  the  First  Part  to  bring  a  great 

many  instances    of   their    sayings :   where    all    that 

40.  mention    that    text,    from   Justin  Martyr    down    to 

300.  St.  Austin,  do  so  apply  it :  and  many  more  might 
be  brought.     Neither  did  I  ever   see   it  otherwise 

T430.  applied  in  any  ancient  writer.  I  believe  Calvin 
was  the  first  that  ever  denied  this  place  to  mean 
baptism'".  He  gives  another  interpretation,  which 
he  confesses  to  be  new.  This  man  did  indeed  write 
many  things  in  defence  of  infant-baptism.  But  he 
has  done  ten  times  more  prejudice  to  that  cause,  by 
withdrawing  (as  far  as  in  him  lay)  the  strength  of 
this  text  of  Scripture,  (which  the  ancient  Christians 
used  as  a  chief  ground  of  it,)  by  that  forced  inter- 
pretation of  his,  than  he  has  done  good  to  it  by  all 
his  new  hypotheses  and  arguments.  What  place  of 
Scripture  is  more  fit  to  produce  for  the  satisfaction 
of  some  plain  and  ordinary  man,  (who  perhaps  is 
not  capable  of  apprehending  the  force  of  the  conse- 

r  Institution,  lib.  iv.  cap.  16.  §.25. 


ever  understood  of  Baptism.  181 

quences  by  which  it  is  proved  from  other  places,)  chap.vi. 

that  he  ought  to  have  his  child  baptized,  than  this,  Z ' — 

(especially  if  it  were  translated  in  English  as  it^iieapo- 
should  be,)  where  our  Saviour  says,  that  no  person 
shall  come  to  heaven  without  it  ?  meaning  at  least 
in  God's  ordinary  way.  It  is  true  that  Calvin  does 
at  other  places  determine  this  to  be  so ;  as  I  shall 
shew  presently  at  §.8.  But  his  dictate  is  but  a 
poor  amends  for  the  loss  of  a  text  of  Scripture. 
Since  his  time,  those  parties  of  the  protestants  that 
have  been  the  greatest  admirers  of  him,  have  follow- 
ed him  in  leaving  out  this  place  from  among  their 
proofs  of  infant-baptism,  and  diverting  the  sense  of 
it  another  way :  which  the  antipicdobaptists  observ- 
ing, have  taken  their  advantage,  and  do  aim  to  shut 
off  all  the  protestant  paedobaptists  from  it.  They 
are  apt  now  to  face  out  any  of  them  that  makes  any 
pretence  to  this  text,  as  going  against  the  general 
sense  of  protestants.  Mr.  Stennet,  in  his  late  an- 
swer to  Mr.  Russen,   (p.  73.)  having  said   that  the 

*  custom  (of  baptizing  infants)  seems  to  have  taken 

*  its  rise  from  a  misinterpretation'  (as  he  calls  it,) 
'  of  this  text ;'  and  having  instanced  in  Chrysostom, 
Cyril,  and  Austin,  as  concluding  from  this  place  a 
necessity  of  baptism  to  salvation,  (and  he  might 
have  added  to  them  all  the  ancient  Christians  that 
ever  spoke  of  this  matter  as  producing  this  text, 
though  not  this  only ;)  he  himself  declares,  that  he 
takes  Calvin's  interpretation,  of  which  he  there 
gives  a  scheme,  to  be  the  truer,  you  may  be  sure. 
Immediately  after  which,  that  which  only  seemed 
before,  he  now  terms  to  be  certain.  And  he  adds, 
'  those  of  the  Romish  church    still  build  their  in- 

*  fant-baptism  on  the  same  principle.'     If  that  be 


182  Our  Saviour's  JRule,  John  iii.  3,  5. 

CHAP.vi.  true,  then  we  may  observe  (by  the  way)  that  he 
Year  after  takes  afterward,  chap,  vi,  a  great  deal  of  pains  to  no 
sties!^"  purpose,  to  prove  that  they  pretend  no  Scripture 
ground  at  all,  but  only  the  authority  of  the  church. 
'  But  this  principle,'  he  says,  '  the  protestants  have 
'Justly  abandoned.'  If  he  mean  the  principle  of  an 
absolute  impossibility  of  salvation  for  a  child  by 
mischance  dying  unbaptized,  as  raised  from  this 
text,  it  is  true.  But  if  he  mean  the  principle  of 
an  impossibility  of  salvation  to  be  had,  according  to 
God's  ordinary  rule  and  declaration,  any  other  way 
than  by  baptism,  I  shall  by  and  by  shew,  that  not 
all  the  protestants,  if  any,  have  abandoned  it.  On 
the  contrary,  they,  most  of  them,  take  this  text  in 
the  sense  that  the  Fathers  did  :  only  they  judge, 
that  in  determining  of  the  future  state  of  an  infant 
so  dying,  we  are  not  to  bind  God  to  the  means  that 
he  has  bound  us  to  ;  but  may  hope  that  for  extraor- 
dinary cases  and  accidents  he  will  make  an  allow- 
ance. As  in  the  case  of  circumcision  omitted,  though 
the  rule  were  as  peremptory  as  this,  That  soul 
shall  he  cut  off:  yet  where  his  providence  made  it 
impracticable  (as  in  those  continual  travels  in  the 
wilderness,  &c.)  he  did  not  execute  the  penalty  :  and 
yet  in  ordinary  cases  the  rule  stood  firm. 

But  see  what  a  triumph  this  antipsedobaptist 
raises,  upon  the  supposal  that  the  protestants  have 
abandoned  this  principle.  '  And  since,'  says  he, 
'  this  foundation  is  by  these  last  [the  protestants] 
'  allowed  to  be  iusufficient  to  bear  the  weight  of  in- 
'  fant-baptism  :  it  might  be  worth  a  further  inquiry, 
'  whether  this  practice  is  founded  on  any  solid 
'  foundation  at  all :  and  if  those  who  appear  first  to 
'  have   used   it,  ])roceeded   on   so  great   a   mistake, 


ever  understood  of  Baptism.  183 


'  whether  this  custom  ought  not  to  be  discontinued,  chap.vl 
'  as  well  as  the   basis   on   which   it   was   originally  Year  after 

,  I    •  1  ?  the  apo- 

'  laid.  sties. 

The  judicious  Mr.  Hooker  saw  betimes  the  in- 
convenience, as  well  as  groundlessness,  of  this  new 
interpretation  of  Calvin's,  which  was  then  greedily 
embraced  by  Cartwright  and  others,  that  they  might 
with  better  face  deny  any  necessity  of  that  private 
baptism,  which  had  been  ordered  by  the  church  in 
cases  of  extremity :  and  says  on  that  account,  '  I 
'  hold  it  for  a  most  infallible  rule  in  expositions  of 
'  sacred  Scripture,  that  where  a  literal  construction 

*  will   stand,  the  farthest  from   the   letter   is   com- 

*  monly  the  worst. To  hide  the  general  con- 

'  sent  of  antiquity  agreeing  in  the  literal  interpre- 
'  tation,    they    cunningly    affirm,   that   certain  have 

*  taken  those  words  as  meant  of  material  water, 
'  when  they  know  that  of  all  the  ancient  there  is 
'  not  one  to  be  named  that  ever  did  otherwise  either 
'  expound  or  allege  the  place  than  as  implying 
'  external  baptism.  Shall  that  which  hath  always 
'  received  this  and  no   other  construction    be    now 

'  disguised  with  the  toy  of  novelty  ? God  will  have 

'  it  [the  sacrament]  embraced  not  only  as  a  sign  or 
'  token  what  we  receive,  but  also  as  an  instrument 
'  or  mean  whereby  we  receive  grace,'  &c. — '  If 
'  Christ  himself  which    giveth   salvation  do  require 

*  baptism,  it  is  not  for  us  that  look  for  salvation  to 
'  sound  and  examine  him,  whether  unbaptized  men 
'  may  be  saved,  but  seriously  to  do  that  which  is 
'  required,  and  religiously  to  fear  the  danger  which 
'  may  grow  by  the  want  thereof,'  &c.  Eccles.  Polity, 
book  V.  $.59,  60. 

2.  By  those  words,  the  kingdom  of  God,  in  this 


184  Oiir  Saviours  Mule,  John  iii.  S,  5. 

CHAP. VI.  text,  they  do  all  of  them  understand  (as  any  one 
\'ear  after  would  naturally  do)  the  kingdom  of  glory  hereafter 
'Xr-     in  heaven. 

This  is  confessed  by  the  right  reverend  author  of 
the  late  Exposition  of  the  Thirty-nine  Articles  of  the 
Church  of  England,  who  goes  about  himself  to  affix 
another  sense  on  those  words,  viz.  that  they  here 
signify  the  c/mrch,  or  the  dispensation  of  the 
Messiah.  For  speaking  of  the  ancient  times,  he 
says  %  '  the  words  of  our  Saviour  to  Nicodemus  were 

*  expounded  so  as  to  import  the  absolute  necessity 

*  of  baptism  in  order  to  salvation  :  for  it  not  being 
'  observed  that  the  dispensation  of  the  Messias  M^as 

*  meant  by  the  kingdom  of  God,  but  it  being  taken 
'  to  signify  eternal  glory,  that  expression  of  our  Sa- 

*  viour's  was  understood  to  import  this,  that  no  man 
'  could  be  saved  unless  he  were  baptized ;'  &c. 

It  must  be  granted,  that  in  some  places  of  the 
New  Testament,  by  these  words,  the  kingdom  of 
God,  is  meant  the  gospel-state  in  this  life.  I  gave 
an  instance  before  S  where  I  think  it  is  so  taken. 
But  it  is  also  often  taken  in  the  ordinary  sense  for 
the  state  of  future  glory.  And  that  it  should 
be  so  taken  here,  I  crave  leave  to  offer  these 
reasons : 

1.  All  the  ancient  expositors  and  other  Fathers, 
both  Greek  and  Latin,  do,  as  I  said,  understand  it 
so.  The  reader  has  seen  a  multitude  of  their  say- 
ings occasionally  here  brought,  whereof  not  one  is 
capable  to  be  understood  otherwise  :  and  I  believe 
none  can  be  produced  that  is.  Hernias,  who  set 
down  in  writing  these  words  of  our  Saviour,  or  the 

s  Bishop  Burnet  on  the  Articles,  Art.  27. 
t  Part  i.  ch.  19.  §.  21. 


ever  understood  of  Baptism.  185 

substance    of  them,    before    St.  John    himself    did,CHAP.vi. 
takes  it  so  :  as  appears  by  his  speaking"  of  people  Year  after 
entering-  this  kingdom  after  their  death.    Tertullian^^^Jj'P''" 
paraphrases,   '  cannot   enter,'   by  non  liahet  salutem, 

*  cannot  be  saved.'  And  so  all  the  rest.  Now  it  is 
hard  to  think  that  not  one  of  the  ancients  should 
expound  it  right. 

2.  Mr.  Walker,  who  had  consulted  as  much  on  the 
exposition  of  this  text  as  any  man,  takes  the  anti- 
paedobaptists  for  the  first  inventors  of  the  new  expo- 
sition :  and  that  it  was  invented  by  them  to  serve  a 
turn.  For  so  are  his  words  >' :  'God's  spiritual 
'  kinofdom  on  earth,  or  the  visible  church,  which  is 

*  all  that  the  anabaptists  will  have  these  words  to 
'  signify :  and  upon  this  design,  because  they  would 
'  by  this  distinction  avoid  the  force  of  the  argument 

*  hence  for  infants'  baptism,'  &c. 

3.  As  he  there  observes,  this  text  explains  itself: 
for  the  expression  being  redoubled  by  our  Saviour 
in  verse  3,  and  again  in  verse  5,  it  is  in  verse  3, 
he  cannot  see  the  kingdom  of  God.  And  St.  Austin 
lono-  aofo  made  this  observation^;  'what  he  had 
'  said,  he  cannot   see,    he    explained    by   saying,  he 

*  cannot  enter  into.'  Now  for  the  church  here ; 
one,  that  is  not  baptized,  may  see  it.  It  is  there- 
fore plainly  meant  of  the  kingdom  of  glory. 

4.  It  is  not  likely  that  our  Saviour  should,  in  his 
discourse  Avith  Nicodemus,  introduce  a  sentence  in 
so  solemn  a  way  of  speaking,  as  to  premise  twice 
over   to  it   these  words  :    Verily,  rcrily,  I  say  unto 

u  See  part  i.  ch.  i.  §.  2.  ^  Ibid.  ch.  iv.  §.  3. 

y  Modest  Plea  for  Infants'  Baptism,  ch.  xii.  §.  8. 
z  Lib.  iii.  de  Anima  et  ejus  origine,  cap.  i  i.  [torn.  x.   p.  382. 
edit.  Benedict.] 


186  Our  Saviour's  Rule,  John  iii.  3,  5. 

CEAV.Yi.thee :  and  yet  at  last  the  sentence  should  come  to 
Year  after  ^^^  Hiore  than  this  ;  that '  without  baptism  one  can- 
the  apo-     i  j-^qj.  |3Q  entered  into  the  church.'     For  '  to  be  bap- 

stles.  ^ 

'  tized,'  and  '  to  be  entered  into  the  church,'  are  terms 
much  about  equivalent. 

Neither  does  it  appear  what  the  antipaedobap- 
tists  gain  by  this  interpretation  of  theirs,  if  it  were 
consistent :  since  the  only  way,  at  least  the  only 
known  and  ordinary  way,  to  the  kingdom  of  glory, 
is  by  being  of  Christ's  church,  or  under  the  dis- 
pensation of  the  Messiah. 

As  for  the  '  absolute  necessity  of  baptism  to 
'  salvation,'  which  the  learned  bishop,  whom  I  men- 
tioned, says  these  words  were  anciently  expounded 
to  import :  I  am  going  presently  to  recite  the  sense 
of  the  ancients  particularly,  how  far  they  expounded 
them  so,  and  how  far  not. 

St.  Austin  is  of  opinion  ^  that  had  it  not  been  for 
this  sentence  of  our  Saviour,  the  Pelagians,  when 
they  were  so  hard  pressed  with  the  arguments  taken 
from  the  baptism  of  infants,  '  would  have  deter- 
'  mined  that  infants  were  not  to  be  baptized  at  all.' 

The  church  of  England,  together  with  the  whole 
ancient  church,  does  apply  and  make  use  of  this 
text  as  a  ground  of  baptizing  infants  :  beginning 
the  office  for  it  thus  ;    '  Forasmuch  as  all  men  are 

*  conceived  and  born  in  sin,  and  that  our  Saviour 
'  Christ  saitli,  None  can  enter  into  the  Mngdom  of 
'  God,   Ccvcept  he  be   regenerate    and   horn    anew    of 

*  water  and  of  the  Holy  Ghost,'  &c.  And  after- 
ward, '  Seeing  now,  dearly  beloved  brethren,  that 
'  this  child  is  regenerate,'  &c.  And  they  do  in  all 
the  three  Offices  of  Baptism,  as  soon  as  the  party  is 

■^  Lib.  i.  de  Peccatoruin  Meritis,  cap.  30. 


ever  understood  of  Baptism.  187 

baptized,  whether  he  be  infant  or  one  of  riper  chap. vi. 
years,  give  thanks  that  he  is  '  regenerated,  and  year  after 
'  grafted  into  the  body  of  Christ's  church.'  *Y  ''^'^' 

And  whereas  some  people  have  expressed  a  won- 
der at  St.  Austin,  that  he  should  hold  'that  all  that 
'  are  baptized  are  also  regenerate  ;'  no  man  living 
can  read  him  without  ])erceiving  that  he  uses  the 
word  regenerate  as  another  word  for  baptized,  and 
that  this  with  him  would  have  been  an  identical 
proposition ;  as  if  one  should  say  nowadays,  '  all 
'  that  are  baptized,  are  christened.' 

If  some  of  late  days  have  put  a  new  sense  on  the 
word  regenerate,  how  can  St.  Austin  help  that? 
And  the  church  of  England  uses  the  word  in  the 
old  sense. 

Many  of  the  late  defenders  of  infant-baptism 
have,  as  I  said,  left  out  this  place  from  among  the 
proofs  that  they  bring  from  Scripture  for  it  :  but 
for  what  reason,  it  is  hard  to  imagine. 

If  they  fear  that  from  hence  will  follow  a  ground 
of  absolute  despair  for  any  new  convert  for  himself, 
and  for  any  parent  in  respect  of  his  child,  dying 
before  he  can  be  baptized :  is  it  not  natural  to  admit 
of  the  same  eTrieiKela  and  allowance  in  these  words, 
as  we  do,  and  must  do,  in  many  other  rules  of  holy 
Scripture  ?  namely,  to  understand  them  thus  ;  that 
this  is  God's  ordinary  rule,  or  the  ordinary  condi- 
tion of  salvation :  but  that  in  extraordinary  cases, 
(where  his  providence  cuts  oft'  all  our  ojjportunity 
of  using  it,)  he  has  also  extraordinary  mercy  to  save 
without  it.  The  ancients,  as  I  shall  shew,  did  hope, 
and  even  conclude  so,  in  case  of  a  convert  believing: 
and  many  in  the  following  ages,  of  an  infant. 

If  the  objection  be,  that  it  is  not  easy  to  conceive 


188  The  Aniipcedohaptists'  Explication 

CHAP. VI.  how  an  infant  can  be  born  or  regenerate  of  the 
Year  alter  Spii'it,  (whicli  is  mentioned  in  the  text,  as  well  as 
sties?''"'  of  water,)  since  he  is  not  capable  of  any  operations 
of  the  Spirit  on  his  will,  &c.  It  is  not  only  OAvned 
by  all  other  Christians,  that  the  Holy  Spirit,  be- 
sides his  office  of  converting  the  heart,  does  seal 
and  apply  pardon  of  sin,  and  other  promises  of  the 
covenant  :  but  also  by  the  antipsedobaptists,  that  the 
Spirit  of  Christ  is  given  or  applied  to  infants.  So 
says  Mr.  Dan  vers  ^,  '  That  they  are  capable  of  salva- 
'  tion   by  Christ's  purchase,  and  the  application   of 

*  Christ's  blood  and  Spirit  to  them ;  who  doubts  it  ? 
'  I  am  sure  I  never  affirmed  the  contrary.'  And 
Mr.  Tombes ;  '  The  grace  of  God  electing  them, 
'  putting    them    into   Christ,  uniting  them   to   him 

*  by  his  Spirit  V&c. 

The  antipsedobaptists  do  themselves  make  use  of 
this  place  of  Scripture  against  the  Quakers  and 
other  antibaptists,  (and  that  with  good  reason,)  to 
prove  the  necessity  of  baptism.  Some  of  them  also, 
that  can  read  no  other  than  the  English  translation, 
will  sometimes  very  unwarily  urge  it  against  the 
paedobaptists ;  and  will  observe  that  it  is  said, 
JEa?cept  a  man  be  born,  &c.  it  is  not  said,  a  child  : 
concluding  from  the  word,  that  he  that  is  so  born 
must  be  a  man  grown.  But  these,  you  will  say, 
are  right  English  divines.  This  may  be  retorted 
on  them  :  for  the  original  is  not  eav  iJ.h  avhp,  or,  eav 
fj-r]  auOpcDTTO's ;  '  except  a  man:'  but  k'av  lut]  rJ?,  '  except 
'  any  one.'  And  so  the  text  is  understood  by  the 
ancients  ;  and  by  all  that  can  read  the  original. 

b  Answer  to  Appeal,  p.  9. 

'■'  Examen.    [of   Marshall's     sermon,    part    ii.   sect.  10.  p.  33. 
edit.  4to.  1645.] 


of  John  iii.  3,  5.  189 

It  is  a  common  thing  with  the  antipsedobaptists,  chap.vl 
when  they  are  attacked  with  that  argument,  that^~7^ 
women's    receiving"    the    communion    is    no    more  ^^'^  ^'^°' 

O  sties. 

plainly  expressed  in  Scripture,  than  infant-baptism, 
to  answer  by  citing  that  text ;  Ao/ct/xa^eVw  kavrov 
avOpaoTTo^,  &c.    '  Let    a  man   examine   himself,    and 

*  so  let  him  eat,'  &c.,  and  to  urge  that  the  word 
ai'OpwTTo?  being  of  the  common  gender  includes 
women  as  well  as  men.  And  they  will  frequently 
boast  and  say,  '  Do  but  produce  as  good  proof  for 

*  baptizing  infants  as  this  text  affords  for  women's 

*  receiving,  and  we  will  comply.'  Nevertheless,  it 
is  not  advisable  for  them  to  venture  any  more  on 
this  challenge  than  they  can  be  content  to  lose. 
For  the  word  r]?  used  here,  eav  lurj  tJ?,  does  (much 
more  naturally  than  the  word  ai^Opco-rro^)  signify  any 
one,  or  any  person,  man,  woman,  or  child.  It  is 
only  an  Anglicism  to  say,  Ecvcept  a  man,  instead  of, 
Ea^cept  a  person  he  born  of  ivater,  &c. 

2.  Thouo^h  the  ancients  understood  the  fore- 
said  text  to  mean  baptism,  and  though  the  words 
are  peremptory,  yet  they  were  of  opinion  that  God 
Almighty  did  in  some  extraordinary  cases,  when 
baptism  could  not  be  had,  dispense  with  his  own 
law.  And  one  case,  which  they  all  agreed  to  be 
exempted,  was  that  of  martyrs.  If  any  one  had 
such  faith  in  Christ,  as  willingly  to  sacrifice  his  life 
for  the  testimony  of  his  truth ;  they  concluded  that 
such  a  man,  whether  he  had  as  yet  been  baptized 
or  not,  was  received  into  the  kingdom  of  heaven  : 
for  this   they  called  haptismum  sanguinis,  '  a  being 

*  baptized  in  blood  :'  referring  to  that  of  our  Saviour, 
Matt.  XX.  22.  Ye  shall  he  baptized  with  the  baptism 
that  I  am  baptized  with. 


190  The  Antipcedohaptists'  Explication 

CHAP. VI.      So  Tertullian^,  'We  have  also  another  baptism, 

Year  after  '  (which  as  Well  as  the  other  can  be  used  but  once,) 

sties^^''      '  namely,  that   of  blood.'     '  Hie   est  bajDtismus  qui 

loo. '  lavacrum  et  non  acceptum  reprsesentat,  et  perdi- 

'  turn  reddit.'     '  This  is  a  baptism  which  will  either 

'  supply  the  place  of  water-baptism  to  one  that  has 

'  not  received  it,  or  will  restore  it  to  one  that  has 

^50- '  lost  [or  defaced]  it.'     The  same  thing  is  owned  by 

Cyprian  *". 

St.  Cyril,  who  says  thus  ;  '  If  one  be  never  so 
'  upright,  and  yet  do  not  receive  the  seal  of  water, 
'  he  cannot  enter  into  the  kingdom  of  heaven  :  this 
'  is  a  bold  speech,  but  it  is  none  of  mine ;  it  is  Jesus 
'  Christ  that  has  made  this  decree^:""  yet  afterward, 
in  the  same  oration,  excepts  martyrs. 
407.  So'  likewise  Fulgentius,  as  positive  as  he  is,  that 
none   can   be   saved  without   baptism,   yet    puts   it, 

*  Exceptis  iis,  qui  pro  Christi  nomine  suo  sanguine 
'  baptizantur^.'   '  Except  those  who  are  for  the  name 

*  of  Christ  baptized  in  their  own  blood.'     Gennadius 
395- speaks  to  the  same  purpose*'. 

And  St.  Austin  saysS  '  Ever  since  the  time  that 
'  our  Saviour  said,  Ecvcept  any  one  he  born  again  of 
'  water ^  &c.,  and  at  another  place.  He  that  shall  lose 
'  his  life  for  my  sake  shall  find  it ;  no  person  is 
'  made  a  member  of  Christ,  but  either  by  baptism 
'  in  Christ,  or  by  death  for  Christ,' 

3.  Beside  the  case  of  martyrs  :  if  a  heathen 
man  was  arrived  to  some  degree  of  belief  of  the 
Christian    religion,    and    confession    of  it,    and    yet 

''  De  Baptismo,  cap.  16.  ^  Epist.  73.  ad  Jubaianum. 

f  Catech.  3.  s  De  Fide  ad  Petrum,  cap.  30. 

h  De  Eccles.  Dogmatibus,  cap.  74. 

i  Lib.  i.  de  Anima,  et  ejus  origine,  cap.  9. 


0/ John  iii.  3,  5.  191 

died  without  baptism  ;  they  judged  of  his  case  with  chap.vi. 
some  distinction.  Yg^^r  .^^i^^. 

For  if  the  man  had  shewn  a  contempt  or  gi'oss  the  apo- 
neglect   of  baptism   as   a  needless   thing,  and  then 
were   cut  off  by  death  without  receiving  it ;   they 
judged  such  a  case  to  be  hopeless.     Tertullian  him-  loo. 
self  calls  that  a  wicked   doctrine,   '  to  think  that 
'  baptism  is  not  necessary  to  those  that  have  faith.' 
His  words  you  have  before,  part  i.  ch.  4.  §.  S.     And 
St.  Ambrose '^  speaks  of  it   as   a   received    opinion,  274. 
'  that  a  catechumen,  though  he  believe  in  the  cross 

*  [or  death]  of  the  Lord  Jesus,  yet  unless  he  be 
'  baptized    in    the   name    of  the   Father,    Son,   and 

*  Holy  Spirit,  cannot  receive  remission  of  sins,  nor 
'  be  partaker  of  the  gift  of  spiritual  grace.'  He 
must  mean,  of  those  that  refuse  or  contemn  bap- 
tism, as  will  appear  by  what  I  shall  quote  from  him 
by  and  by.  And  Gregory  Nazianzen,  speaking  of 260. 
three  sorts  of  persons  that  die  unbaptized,  reckons 
these  the  worst,  and  likely  to  have  the  greatest 
puni^ment.     His  words  are  recited  in  part  i.  ch.ll. 

^.  6.  St.  Austin's  words  also  I  produced  before, 
part  i.  ch.  15.  sect.  4.  §.  3.  '  But  when  a  man 
'  goes  without  it  by  his  wilful  neglect  of  it,  he  is 

*  involved  in  guilt :  for  that  must  not  be  called  a 
'  conversion  of  the  heart  to  God,  when  God's  sacra- 
'  ment  is  contemned.'  So  that  the  learned  Vossius, 
in  his  book  of  baptism,  Disp.  6.  Thes.  6.  having 
spoken  of  some  points  of  baptism  in  which  the 
opinions  of  the  Fathers  differed,  owns  them  to 
have  been  unanimous  in  this :  '  This  is,'  says  he, 
'  the  judgment   of  all    antiquity,   that   they  perish 

k   Lib.    de    his    qui    initiantur,    c.  4.    [  sect.  20.  Op.  torn.  ii. 
P-  330-1 


192  Case  of  Martyrs  dying  unbaptized. 

CHAP.  VI. '  eternally,  who   despise  baptism,  i.  e.  will  not   be 

Year  after   '  baptized  when  they  may.' 

sties^^"'  If  ^^  were  one  that  intended  to  be  baptized  some 

time  or  other,  but  put  it  off  from  time  to  time, 
either  out  of  a  negligent  delay,  or  out  of  a  desire  of 
enjoying  unlawful  lusts  some  time  longer,  and  then 
happened  finally  to  miss  it ;  as  St.  Chrysostom  says 
he  had  known  it  happen  too  often :  they  judged 
260.  such  an  one  lost ;  though  not  liable  to  so  great 
punishment  as  he  that  had  absolutely  despised  it. 
So  Gregory  Nazianzen  determines  in  the  place  last 
mentioned  ;  and  their  sayings  to  that  purpose  are 
too  common  to  need  repeating.  I  shall  recite  only 
one  of  Hernias  for  its  antiquity,  being  writ  in  the 
apostles'  time.  He  speaks  ^  of  a  vision  which  he 
saw  of  the  building  of  the  church  triumphant, 
under  the  emblem  of  a  tower  built  with  several 
stones  :  and  he  saw""  many  sorts  of  stones  rejected 
and  cast  far  from  the  toM^er.  And  among  the  rest, 
some  '  cadentes  secus  aquam,  nee  posse  volvi  in 
*  aquam,  volentibus  quideni  eis  intrare  in  aquam  :' 
'  that  fell  nigh  the  water,  [on  which  the  tower  was 
'  built,]  and  though  they  seemed  desirous  to  go 
'  into  the  water,  could  not  roll  into  it.'  And  in  the 
explication",  he  asks,  '  What  are  those  other  that 
'  fell  nigh  the  water,  and  could  not  roll  into  the 
'w^ater?'  Answer  is  made,  'They  are  such  as 
'  heard  the  word,  and  had  a  mind  to  be  baptized 
'  in  the  name  of  the  Lord :  but  considerinjr  the 
'  great  holiness  which  the  truth  requires,  withdrew 
'  themselves,  and  walked  again  after  their  M-icked 
'  desires.'  And  I  think  it  very  probable  that  St. 
James  means  this  sort  of  men,  ch.  i.  6,  7,  8,  where 

I  Pastor,  lib.  i.  vision. 3.  ™  Vis. 3.  cap.  2.  "  Ibid.  cap.  7. 


T'hose  that  missed  of  Baptism  hj  Delay.  193 

he  speaks  of  some  that  were  double-minded^  waver- cy^kyni. 
ing,  imstahle,  tossed  to  and  fro  in  their  resokitions  ;  Year  after 
and  he  says  there,  that   such  shall  receive    nothi?i(/^^^^^^^' 
of  the  Lord. 

Some  put  off  their  baptism  a  long  time,  fearing 
lest  after  it  they  might  fall  into  sin  again.  These 
Tertullian  commends,  and  advises  to  stay  till  theioo. 
danger  of  lust  is  over :  and  says  at  one  place",  that 
to  such  men,  if  they  should  happen  to  miss  of  ba}> 
tism,  'an  entire  faith  is  secure  of  salvation.'  But 
all  the  rest  do  much  discommend  this  ])ractice ;  as 
appears  at  large  in  the  sermons  made  to  the  catechu- 
mens by  St.  Basil,  St.  Gregory  Nazianzen,  St.  Gre- 
gory Nyssen,  St.  Chrysostom,  and  others. 

Nazianzen  says,  this   is  the  '  deceit  of  the  Devil  ^f'o. 
'  counterfeiting  holiness,  and    cheating  men  of  the 
'  grace  of  baptism,  by  persuading  them  to  an  over- 
'  caution  :  that  by  means  of  their  fear  of  staining 
'  their  baptism  they  may  altogether  miss  of  it?.' 

Nyssen  says*i,  that  of  the  two  it  is  better  to  re- 260. 
ceive  it  now,  though  one  should  fall  into  sin  after, 
than  to  hazard  the  loss  of  it  by  this  caution.  For 
to  those  that  sin  afterward,  he  allows  hopes  of  par- 
don upon  repentance  :  but  of  those  that  die  M'ithout 
being  baptized  at  all,  he  says,  '  When  I  hear  that 
'  peremptory  sentence,  Verily^  verily,  I  say  unto 
'  thee,  Ea7cept  one  be  born  again,  &c.  I  dare  not 
'  forbode  any  good  to  those  that  are  not  initiated.' 

Chrysostom'"  brings   in    these  men  arguing;    and  380. 
answers  them  :  '"  I  am  afraid ;"  says  one.     If  you 
'  were  afraid,  you  would  receive   baptism  and  pre- 

o  See  part  i.  ch.  iv.  §.5.  P  Or.  40. 

f]  Orat.  adversus  eos  qui  difFerunt  baptismum. 

•■  Horn.  I.  in  Acta  Apost.  [torn.  ix.  p.  i  i,  13.  edit.  Montf.] 

WALL,  VOL.  II.  O 


194  Those  that  rnissed  of  Baptism  hy  Delay. 

CHAP.vi. '  serve  it.     "  But  I  therefore  receive  it  not,  because 
Year  after  '  I  am  afraid."     But  are  you   not  afraid  to  die  in 

sties!^*'"      '  *l^^s   condition  ? He  that   sins  after  baptism 

'  (as  it  is  like  he  will,  being  but  a  man)  will,  if  he 
'  repent,  obtain  mercy.  But  he  that,  making  a 
'  sophistical  use  of  the  mercy  of  God,  departs  this 
'  life  without  the  grace,  will  have  inevitable  punish- 
'  ment.'     And  afterward,  '  In  what  anguish  of  mind 

*  am  I,  think  you,  when  I  hear  of  any  one  that  is 
'  dead  that  was  not  baptized,  considering  those 
'  unsufferable  torments?'  And  in  another  tract  % 
'  If  sudden  death  seize  us,  which  God  forbid,  before 

*  we  are  baptized  ;  though  we  have  a  thousand  good 
'  qualities,  there  is  nothing  to  be  expected  but  hell.' 

ISC-  Firmilian,  bishop  of  Caesarea  in  Cappadocia,  who 
was  of  the  same  opinion  as  St.  Cyprian  was,  that 
baptism  given  by  heretics  is  null,  asks  (by  way  of 
objection  to  himself)  this  question ^ ;  what  should 
be  said  of  the  case  of  those,  who  having  come  from 
the  heretics  to  the  church,  and  having  been  received 
without  a  new  baptism,  were  since  dead  without  it  ? 
He  answers ;  '  They  are  to  be  accounted  in  the  same 
'  state  as  those  that  have  been  catechumens  among 
'  us,  and  have  died  before  they  were  baptized.'  But 
what  he  thought  that  state  to  be,  cannot  be  plainly 
known,  because  the  next  words  are  very  obscure: 
yet  Rigaltius,  by  an  amendment  of  the  words, 
(without  the  authority  of  any  manuscript,)  makes 
them  favourable  for  the  case  of  such  deceased  per- 
sons :  and  bishop  Fell"  allows  of  his  opinion. 

s  Horn.  24.  in  Joann.  [torn.  viii.  p.  147." 
t  Apud  Cyprian.  Epist.  75.  prope  finem. 

"    [See    Cypriani    Opera,    edit.    Fell.    Oxon.    1682.    part.    ji. 
p.  226.] 


Those  that  missed  of  Baptism  hy  Delay.  195 

If  any  of  the  foresaid  sorts  of  men  did  put  ofFcHAP.vi. 
their   baptism  till   some  dangerous    sickness  seized  vear  after 
them,  and  then  were  baptized  in  their  sick  bed,  and^^jg^^P'^ 
died :  though  they  did  give  hopes  that  such  a  bap- 
tism was   available   to   salvation,  yet  they  counted 
these  no  creditable  sort  of  Christians,  because  they 
seemed  to  come  to  it  no  otherwise  but  by  mere  con- 
straint.    Nay,   Nyssen^  reckons  these  among  such 
as   shall  not  be  punished,  but,   on   the   other   side, 
shall  not  go  to  heaven.     There  were  ancient  canons, 
that  such,  if  they  recovered,  should  never  be  admit- 
ted  to   holy   orders  ;  as  appears  by  the  epistles  of 
Cornelius  recited  by  Eusebius  ^.     Though  it  appear  150- 
by  the  same  that  Novatian  was  dispensed  with   for 
this  incapacity. 

But  there  is  one  case  of  a  man's  dying  unbap- 
tized,  on  which  they  generally  put  a  favourable  con- 
struction, though  with  some  difference  of  opinion 
concerning  his  future  state.  And  that  is,  if  a  man 
while  he  was  in  health  were  come  to  a  steadfast  re- 
solution of  being  baptized  the  next  opportunity,  but 
were  hindered  by  sudden  death,  or  some  other  un- 
avoidable impediment.  Nazianzen's  opinion  of  such 
is,  that  they  shall  not  be  punished  ;  and  yet  neither, 
on  the  contrary,  shall  they  be  glorified.  He,  as  well 
as  Nyssen,  and  many  other  of  the  Greek  church, 
seems  to  have  thought  that  there  is  a  middle  state, 
not  partaking,  or  not  much,  either  of  happiness  or 
misery.  You  have  his  words,  part  i.  ch.  11.  §.  6. 
He  shewed  also,  by  that  anguish  of  soul  which  he 
himself  felt  when  he  was  like  to  die  without  bap- 

"  Orat.  adversus  eos  qui  difFerunt  Baptismum. 
X  Hist.  Eccles.  lib.  vi.  cap.  43. 

O  2 


196  Those  that  missed  of  Baptism  by  Delay. 

CHAP.vi.  tism  y,  that  he  feared  either  hell,  or  at  least  the  loss 

Year  after    of  heaveil. 

sdes^^*'  St.  Ambrose   speaks   at   one   place    doubtfully   of 

these  men's  escaping  punishment,  but  more  doubt- 
fully of  their  obtaining  any  reward,  in  the  words 
which  I  cited  in  part  i.  ch.  13.  J.  2.  'But  suppose 
'  they  do  obtain  a  freedom  from  punishment,  yet  I 
*  question  whether  they  shall  have  the  crown  of  the 
'  kingdom.'  But  yet  afterward  he  gives  his  opinion 
positively  in  the  case  of  Valentinian,  (who  missed  of 
baptism  in  the  manner  we  now  speak  of,)  that  his 
desire  of  baptism  was  accepted  instead  of  baptism, 
not  only  for  pardon,  but  also  for  glorification :  as 
was  shewed  in  ch.  iii.  sect.  3.  §.  3. 

St.  Austin  embraces  this  opinion  of  St.  Ambrose 
last  mentioned  ;  and  gives  a  proof  of  it  out  of 
Scripture  from  the  example  of  the  penitent  thief: 
'  Which,'  says  he'-,  '  when  I  consider  thoroughly,  I 
'  find  that  not  only  martyrdom  for  the  name  of 
'  Christ  may  supply  the  want  of  baptism  ;  but  also 
'  faith  and  the  conversion  of  the  heart,  in  a  case 
'  where  by  reason  of  the  straitness  of  the  time  the 
'  sacrament  of  baptism  cannot  be  celebrated.  For 
'  that  thief  was  not  crucified  for  the  name  of 
'  Christ,  but  for  his  own  ill  deserts:  neither  did  he 
'  suffer  for  his  belief;  but  while  he  was  suffering, 
'  he  came  to  believe.  So  that  in  his  case  it  appears 
'  how  much  that  which  the  apostle  says,  with  the 
'  heart  we  believe  unto  righteousness,  o,nd  with  the 
'  mouth  confession  is  made  unto  salvation^  does 
'  avail   without   the  visible    sacrament    of    baptism. 

y  See  ch.  iii.  sect.  6.  §.  i. 

''■  Contra  Donatistas,  lib.  iv.  cap.  22.  [Op.  torn.  ix.  p.  139. 
edit.  Benedict.] 


Clinical  Baptism.     Infants.  197 

*  But    it   is  then   fulfilled  invisibly,    when    not   the  chap.  vi. 
'  contempt  of  religion,  but  some  sudden  exigent  of  Year  after 
'  necessity,  keeps  one  from  baptism.'  sties!^'' 

Since  this  thief  had  a  promise  of  paradise  ;  it  is 
plain  that  St.  Austin  means,  that  a  man  dying  in 
that  case  may  have  hopes,  not  only  of  impunity,  but 
of  reward.  Besides  that  he  thought  there  is  no 
middle  place. 

In  his  Retractations  ^,  he  considers  this  matter 
over  again  ;  and  says,  the  example  of  the  thief  is  not 
absolutely  fit  for  this  purpose,  '  because  one  is  not 
'  sure  whether  he  were  baptized  or  not,'  i.  e.  some 
time  in  his  life  before,  which  is  very  improbable. 
Yet  he  insists  on  the  probability  of  it  in  his  writings 
against  Vincentius  Victor  **. 

IV,  One  might  have  thought,  that  they  should 
have  as  good  hopes  of  the  state  of  an  infant  dying 
unbaptized,  as  of  a  heathen  convert,  who  believed, 
and  sincerely  desired  baptism,  dying  likewise  unbap- 
tized :  since  it  may  be  said  of  the  infant,  as  well  as 
of  the  other,  that  it  is  not  his  fault,  but  mischance, 
that  he  is  not  baptized.  And  Nazianzen  and  the 
others  that  do  allot  a  middle  state  to  the  one,  do 
allot  the  same  to  the  other.  But  St.  Austin,  and 
those  who  allow  of  no  state  absolutely  middle,  have 
hopes  of  the  convert's  (such  as  the  thief  was)  going 
to  heaven,  though  unbaptized  ;  but  no  hopes  of  an 
unbaptized  infant's  escaping  some  degree  of  con- 
demnation. 

The  reason  of  the  difference,  as  they  seem  to  un- 
derstand it,  is,  that  whereas  God  ordinarily  requires 
both   faith   and   baj)tism,   yet   that    either   of  them 

'  Lib.  ii.  cap.  i8.  QOp.  torn.  i.  p.  48.] 
b  [See  above,  part  i.  ch.  20,  sect.  2.  &c.] 


198  Infants  dying  iinbaptized 

CHAP.vi.  (when  the  other  cannot  be  had)  may  suffice  to  salva- 
Year  after  tion.  As  the  thief  having  no  baptism,  but  having 
sdes'^'''  f^ith  and  the  desire  of  baptism,  was  saved  :  and 
infants,  having  not  faith,  but  having  baptism  are 
saved  :  but  infants  dying  unbaptized,  having  neither 
faith  nor  baptism,  cannot  escape  some  degree  of 
condemnation  for  original  sin. 

To  this  purpose  are  St.  Austin's  words  ^\  *  as  in 
'  the  case  of  the  thief,  who  by  necessity  went  with- 

*  out  baptism  corporally,  salvation  was  obtained, 
'  because  he  spiritually  was  partaker  of  it  by  his 
'  godly  desire  :  so  where  that   [baptism}  is  had,  sal- 

*  vation  is  likewise  obtained,  though  the  party  go 
'  without  that  [faith]  which  the  thief  had.'     And  so 

'015- likewise  St.  Bernard ''  resolves  the  case  from  St. 
Austin.  Having  said  that  a  man  having  faith,  and 
the  desire  of  baptism,  may  be  saved  though  he  miss 
of  baptism,  he  adds  ;  'infants  indeed,  since  by  reason 
'  of  their  age  they  cannot  have  faith,  nor  the  con- 
'  version  of  the  heart  to  God,  consequently  can  have 
'  no  salvation  if  they  die  without  baptism.' 

The  ancients  had  not  all  of  them  the  same  opinion 
concerning  the  death  that  is  brought  on  mankind  by 
254.  original  sin.  The  author  of  that  Comment  which 
has  been  ascribed  to  St.  Ambrose,  but  has  since 
been  thought  to  be  Hilary  the  deacon's,  and  by  others 
to  be  mixed  out  of  several  ancient  works,  thinks  it 
to  be  only  temporal  death.  The  words  that  are  two 
or  three  lines  before  those  I  am  going  to  recite,  are 
for    certain  Hilary's,    (for    St.  Austin    quotes    them 

c  De  Baptismo  contra  Donatistas,  lib.  iv.  cap.  23.  [Op.  torn, 
ix.  p.  140.] 

d  Epist.  77.  ad  Hugonem  de  Sancto  Victore.  [Op.  torn.  ii.  p. 
98,  &c.  edit.  fol.  Pari.s.  1586.] 


miss  of  Heaven.  I99 

under  his  name  ^     The   words  to  this  purpose  are  chap.  vi. 
these,  Comment,  in  Rom.  v.     Having  spoken  of  the  year  after 
death   which  St.  Paul  says  came  on  all  by  Adam's  ^[jgj'P"' 
sin,  he   adds ;  '  there  is  also    another  death,   which 
'  is  called  the  second  death  in  hell,  which  we  do  not 
'  suffer   for   the    sin    of   Adam  :    but    by    occasion 
'  thereof  it  is  brought  on   us  by  our  own  sins.'     It 
is  plain  this  man  would  not  have  sentenced  infants 
to  the  second  death  in  hell.     But  the  more  common 
opinion,   I   think,   especially  in    the    western   parts, 
was,  that  the  death  threatened  to  Adam,  and  com- 
ing  by   original    sin    on    all    by  nature,    is    eternal 
death.     Pacianus  teaches  so  in  his  Sermon  of  Bap- 260. 
tism^:  '  ]\Iind,  O  beloved,  in  what  death  a  man  is 
'  before  he  be  baptized.     You  know  that  received 
'  point,  that    Adam  was   the    head    of   our  earthly 

*  origin  :  whose  condemnation  brought  on  him  sub- 

*  jection  to  eternal  death,  and   on  all  his   posterity, 
'  who  were  all  under  one  law.' 

Accordingly  they  differed  concerning  the  future 
state  of  infants  dying  unbaptized  :  but  all  agreed 
that  they  missed  of  heaven. 

Those  of  the  Greek  church  do  generally  incline 
to  the  opinion  of  that  middle  state.  Their  words 
are  cited  in  the  first  part :  viz.  Nazianzen's,  ch.  xi. 
f  6.  Those  of  the  author  of  the  questions  in  Justin 
IVIartyr,  ch.  xxiii.  §.  3.  And  those  of  the  author  of 
the  Qiicestioiics  ad  Antiochum,  ibid.  The  opinion 
of  Pelagius,  (who  conversed  most  in  the  Greek 
church,)  ch.  xix.  passim.  The  words  of  St.  Am- 
brose (who  transcribed  most  that  he  wrote  from 
Greek  authors),  ch.  xiii.  §.  2. 

e  Lib.  iv.  ad  Bonifac.  cap.  4.  [Sect.  7.  Op.  torn.  x.  p.  472.] 
f  [See  this  in  the  BibUotheca  Patrum,  torn.   iv.   p.  246.   edit. 
Colon.  161 8.] 


200  St.  Austin'' s  Opmion  of  their  State. 

CHAP. VI.  But  St.  Austin,  and  most  of  the  Latin  church  in 
Year  after  ^^is  time,  holding  no  such  middle  state,  do  believe 
stiesT '  ^^^^^^  infants  under  some  degree  of  condemnation  : 
whose  words  you  have  in  the  fifteenth,  nineteenth, 
and  twentieth  chapters.  Both  one  and  the  other 
agree  in  this,  that  infants  dying  unbaptized  cannot 
come  to  the  kingdom  of  heaven. 

How  hard  soever  this  opinion  may  seem,  it  is  the 
constant  opinion  of  the  ancients  :  none  ever  having 
maintained  the  contrary  in  these  times,  nor  a  great 
319-  while  after,  except  that  Vincentius  Victor  mentioned 
in  the  twentieth  chapter  of  the  First  Part,  who  also 
quickly  recanted.  St.  Austin,  in  a  letter  to  St. 
Hierome,  s  says,  '  Whoever  should  affirm  that  in- 
'  fants  which  die  without  partaking  of  this  sacrament 
'  shall  be  quickened  in  Christ,  M'ould  both  go  against 
'  the  apostles'  preaching,  and  also  would  condemn 
'  the  whole  church :  imiversam  ecclesiam.''  iVnd 
of  the  Pelagians,  who,  believing  no  original  sin,  had 
therefore  the  most  favourable  opinion  of  any  that 
was  then  held,  of  the  natural  state  of  infants,  he 
says  ;  '  that  even  they,  being  awed  by  the  authority 
'  of  the  Gospel,  or  rather  Christianoriim  popidorum 
'  concordissima  fidei  conspiratione  perfracti,  being 
'  overswayed  by  the  agreeing  consent  in  the  faith  of 
'  all  Christian  people,  sine  iilla  recusatione  conce- 
'  dtmt  quod  mdliis  parvidus,  nisi,  &c.  do  without 
'  any  tergiversation  own,  that  no  infant  that  is  not 
'  born  again  of  water  and  of  the  Spirit,  does  enter 
*  into  the  kingdom  of  God  '\' 

Tertullian  himself,  who   at   one   place  advises   to 
keep  children  unbaptized  till  the   age  of  reason,  is 

^  Epist.  28.  [166.  in  edit.  Benedict.] 

h  Epist.  105.  ad  Sixtum,  prope  finem.    [cap.  7.  sect.  52.  Epist. 
194.  edit.  Benedict.]] 


St.  Austin's  Opinion  of  their  State.  201 

thought  by  the  psedobaptists,  and  confessed  by  some  chap.vi. 
of  tlie  other  side,  to  mean  '  when  there  is  no  danger  yg^r  after 
'  of  death  before  :'  because  he  owns  it  for  a  standing  ^^^^^^°' 
rule,  that  '  without   baptism  there  is  no   salvation 
'  for  any  person  ^' 

And  Nazianzen,  who  advises  to  defer  their  bap- 
tism till  they  are  three  years  old  or  thereabouts, 
expresses  himself  with  this  limitation,  *  if  there  be 
'  no  danger  of  death.'  And  if  there  be  any  danger, 
advises  it  to  be  given  out  of  hand,  as  a  thing  with- 
out which  they  will,  he  says,  'not  be  glorified^.' 
And  except  these  two,  none  speak  of  any  delay  of 
it  at  all. 

V.  But  that  party  that  believed  no  middle  state, 
and  thought  that  the  Scripture  obliges  us  to  confess 
that  infants  are  under  some  degree  of  condemnation, 
and  that  they  are  by  nature  cJiildreu  of  that  ■wrath 
mentioned  Eph.  ii.  3 ;  yet  believed  that  it  is  a  very 
moderate  and  mild  punishment  which  they  shall 
suffer,  if  they  die  unbaptized.  This  I  speak  of  the 
times  of  our  period  of  the  first  four  centuries  :  for 
afterward  the  opinion  grew  more  rigid,  as  we  shall 
see. 

St.  Austin  does  very  often  assert  this  mild  degree 
of  their  condemnation  ;  because  the  Pelagians  did 
not  fail  to  represent  the  doctrine  of  original  sin 
odious,  upon  the  account  of  such  infants  as  missed 
of  baptism,  sometimes  not  by  their  parents'  fault, 
but  by  some  unavoidable  accident.  He  thinks  it 
necessary  to  maintain  against  these  men  the  doc- 
trine itself,  though  it  be  severe :  but  he  takes  care 
not  to  represent  it  more  severe  than  he  thought  the 

i  See  part  i.  ch.  4.  §.  3.  ^  See  part  i.  ch.  11.  §.  6. 


202  St.  Austin'' s  Opinioti  of  their  State. 

CHAP.vi.  plain  words  of  Scripture  enforced.  Therefore  as  in 
Year  after  One  place  of  his  book\  De  Peccatorum  Meritis,  he 
sties'^*'  says,  '  Let  us  not  therefore  of  our  own  head  promise 
'  any  eternal  salvation  to  infants  without  the  bap- 
'  tism  of  Christ,  which  the  holy  Scripture,  that  is  to 
'  be  preferred  to  all  human  wit,  does  not  promise.' 
So  in  another  chapter  of  that  book  he  has  these 
words : 

'  It  may  well  be  said,  that  infants  departing  this 
'  life  without  baptism  will  be  under  the  mildest 
'  condemnation  of  all.  But  he  that  affirms  that  they 
'  will  not  be  under  condemnation,  does  much  deceive 
*  us,  and  is  deceived  himself:  when,  as  the  apostle 
'  says,  Judgment  came  on  all  men  to  condemnation''^ I 
&c.  To  the  same  purpose  he  speaks  in  his  Enchi- 
ridion, cap.  93. 

In  another  book  of  his  it  appears  how  mild  he 
thought  this  condemnation  might  be  :  even  so  mild, 
that  to  be  in  that  state  might  be  better  than  to  have 
no  being  at  all.  For  Julian  the  Pelagian  had  ob- 
jected, that  if  the  doctrine  of  original  sin  were  true, 
it  were  a  cruel  and  wicked  thing  to  beget  children ; 
who  would  be  born  in  a  state  of  condemnation,  and 
consequently  in  such  a  state  as  that  it  were  to  be 
wished  they  had  never  been  born :  citing  that  of 
our  Saviour,  Well  were  it  for  that  yuan  that  he  had 
never  been  born.  To  this  St.  Austin  answers ", 
that  God  is  the  author  of  being  to  all  men  ;  many 
of  whom,  as  Julian  must  confess,  will  be  eternally 
condemned :  and  yet  God  is  not  to  be  accused  of 
cruelty   for  creating  them.     And   further,   that  all 

I  Cap.  23.  '"  Cap.  15. 

II  Lib.  V.  contra  Julianum,  cap.  11.  [Sect.  44.  Op.  torn.  x. 
p.  650.  edit.  Benedict.] 


St.Ausfiris  Opinion  of  their  State.  203 

godly  parents  will  take  all  care  possible  for  baptiz-CHAP.vi. 
ing  their  children,  which  will  take  off  that  original  y^av  after 
guilt,  and  make  them  heirs  of  a  glorious  kingdom.  *Y  ^^°' 
And  as  to  those   infants   that  yet   die    unbaptized, 
answers  thus : 

'  I  do  not  say,  that  infants  dying  without  the  bap- 
'  tism  of  Christ  will  be  punished  with  so  great  pain, 

*  as  that  it  were  better  for  them  not  to  have  been 
'  born  :  since  our  Lord  spoke  this,  not  of  all  sinners, 
'  but  of  the  most  profligate  and  impious  ones.  For 
'  if  in  the  day  of  judgment  some  shall  be  punished 

*  in  a  more  tolerable  degree  than  others  ;  as  he  said 

*  of  the  men  of  Sodom,  and  would  be  understood  not 
'  of  them  only :  who  can  doubt,  but  that  infants  un- 
'  baptized,  who  have  only  original  sin,  and  are  not 
'  loaded  with  any  sins  of  their  own,  will  be  in  the 
'  gentlest  condemnation  of  all  ?  Which  as  I  am  not 
'  able  to  define  what  or  how  great  it  will  be  ;  so  I 

*  dare  not  say  that  it  would  be  better  for  them  not 
'  to  be  at  all,  than  to  be  in  that  state. 

*  And  you  yourselves,  who  contend  that  they  are 
'  free  from  all  condemnation,  are  not  willing  to  con- 
'  sider  to  what  condemnation  you  make  them  sub- 
'  ject,  when  you  separate  from  the  life  of  God  and 
'  the  kingdom  of  God  so  many  images  of  God  :  and 

*  also  when  you  separate  them  from  their  pious 
'  parents,  whom  you  expressly  encourage  to  the  be- 
'  getting  of  them.  If  they  have  no  original  sin,  it 
'  is  unjust  that  they  should  suffer  so  much  as  that : 
'  or  if  they  suffer  that  justly,  then  they  have  original 
'  sin.' 

He  shews  that  the  future  state  in  which  the 
Pelagians  thought  such  infants  would  be,  is  not  so 
different  from  that  in  which  he  judged  they  would 


204  St.  Austin's  Opinion  of  their  State. 

CHAP.vi.be,  as  they  did  invidiously  represent.  For  they 
Year  after  confessed  that  without  baptism  they  coukl  not  come 
sdes!''"'  *°  ^^®  kingdom  of  God,  but  must  eternally  be  se- 
parated from  God  and  from  their  parents  :  but  they 
would  not  call  this  condemnation.  He  judged  that 
they  were  under  condemnation,  but  so  gentle,  that 
probably  that  state  would  be  better  than  no  being 
at  all ;  and  consequently,  that  they  or  their  parents 
would  have  no  reason  to  wish  that  they  had  never 
been  born. 

St.  Austin  does  so  generally  observe  this  rule  of 
speaking  with  great  caution  and  tenderness  of  the 
degree  of  their  condemnation ;  that  when  Erasmus 
came  to  revise  his  works,  he  quickly  found  that  the 
de  Fide  ad  Petrwn  was  none  of  his"  ;  for  this  reason 
among  others,  because  the  author  (who  is  since 
410.  known  to  be  Fulgentius)  does  express  the  condemna- 
tion of  infants  that  die  unbaptized  in  such  rigid 
terms,  as  that  '  whether  they  die  in  their  mother's 
'  womb,  or  after  they  are  bornP,  one  must  hold  for 
'  certain  and  undoubted,  that  they  are  ipiis  ceterni 
'  supplicio  sempiterno  puniendi,  to  be  tormented 
'  with  the  everlasting  punishment  of  eternal  fire ;' 
and  again <i,  interminabilia  gehenncB  siistiuere  sup- 
plicia :  ubi  Diaholus,  &c.  '  to  suffer  the  endless  tor- 
'  ments  of  hell ;  where  the  Devil  with  his  angels  is 
'  to  burn  for  evermore.  This,'  says  Erasmus,  '  I 
'  never  read  any  where  else  in  St.  Austin ;  though 
'  he  does  frequently  use  the  words  punishment,  con- 
'  demnation,  perisMng.^ 

o  Erasmi  Censura  ad  istum  librum.  [See  this,  among  the 
supposititious  pieces,  in  the  Appendix  to  torn.  vi.  p.  19,  &c.  of 
the  Benedictine  edition.] 

P  Cap.  27.  q  Cap.  3.  [sect.  36.] 


^i^.  Austin's  Opinion  of  their  State.  205 

Erasmus'  observation  is  true  for  the  general.     Yet  chap.vi. 
it  must  be  confessed,  that  in  one   sermon'"  of  his,  x^       ^ 

'  '  1  ear  after 

where   he   is   eao^erly  declaiminsr  against   the   Pela-*^^^Po- 

°       •'  &       O  sties. 

gians,  who  taught  that  infants  were  baptized  not 
for  eternal  life  but  for  the  kingdom  of  heaven,  and 
that  if  they  die  unbaptized  they  will  miss  of  the 
kingdom  of  heaven  indeed,  but  have  eternal  life  in 
some  other  good  place ;  he  confutes  their  opinion 
thus :  '  Our  Lord  will  come  to  judge  the  quick  and 
*  the  dead  :  and  he  will  make  two  sides,  the  right 
'  and  the  left.  To  those  on  the  left  hand  he  will 
'  say.  Depart  into  everlasting  fire,  &c.  To  those 
'  on  the  right,  Come,  receive  the  kingdom,''  &c.  He 
'  calls  one  the  kingdom ;  the  other,  condemtiation 
'  with  the  Devil.  There  is  no  middle  place  left 
'  where  you  can  put  infants.' — And  afterward  ; 
'  Thus  I  have  explained  to  you  what  is  the  kingdom, 
'  and  what  everlasting  fire :  so  that  when  you  con- 
'  fess  the  infant  will  not  be  in  the  kingdom,  you 
'  must  acknowledge  he  will  be  in  everlasting  fire ^ 

But  these  words  came  from  him  in  the  midst  of 
a  declamatory  dispute.  He  would,  if  he  had  been 
to  explain  himself,  have  said,  as  in  other  places,  that 
this  fire  would  be  to  them  the  most  moderate  of  all. 
Though  he  speak  of  this  matter  one  or  two  thou- 
sand times,  yet  he  never,  as  I  know  of,  mentions 
the  word  eternal  fire  in  their  case  but  here.  So 
that  we  must  either  conclude  that  the  heat  of  con- 
troversy carried  him  in  that  extempore  sermon  be- 
yond his  usual  thought ;  or  else  we  must  conclude, 
by  Erasmus'  rule,  that  that  sermon  is  none  of  his. 


'■  De   verbis    Apostoli,    Serm.    14.    [294.    edit.    Benedict,    op. 
torn.  V.  p.  II  85.] 


206  Opinion  of  Fulc/entius,  Gregory/,  Sfc. 

CHAP. VI.      It  was   the  foresaid  book   of  Fulgentiiis,  (which 
Year  after  assGi'ts  this  dogmatically,  and  over  and  over,)  being 
sdes^^*'"      commonly  joined  with  his  works,  and  taken  for  his, 
that  fixed  on  him  in  after-ages  the  title  of  Durus 
infantum  pater :    '  The  father   that    is    so    hard    to 
410. '  infants.'     It  was  Fulgentius,  that  lived   one   hun- 
dred years  after,  and  not  he,  that  most  deserved  that 
name. 

Whereas  Grotius  observes ^  that  St.  Austin  never 
expressed  any  thing  at  all  of  their  condemnation, 
not  even  to  those  lesser  pains,  till  after  he  had  been 
heated  by  the  Pelagian  disputes  ;  seeming  to  inti- 
mate that  he  was  not  of  that  opinion  before ;  but 
took  it  up  then  in  opposition  to  the  Pelagians  :  I 
have  shewed  before*  what  St.  Austin  himself  says 
to  that  imputation ;  for  it  was  objected  by  some  in 
his  lifetime. 

VI.  I  shall  here  make  a  short  excursion  beyond 

my  limits  of  four  hundred  years :  and  see  how  the 

opinions  of  men  did  come  to  some  abatement  of  this 

433- rigour  after  the  time  of  Fulgentius,  who  died  anno 

533. 
500.  In  pope  Gregory's  time,  anno  Dom.  600,  the  opin- 
ion of  their  being  tormented  continued.  For  he 
speaks  thus":  'Some  are  taken  from  this  present 
'  life  before  they  come  to  have  any  good  or  ill  de- 
*  serts  by  their  own  deeds :  and  having  not  the  sa- 
'  crament  of  salvation  for  their  deliverance  from  ori- 
'  ginal  sin,  though  they  have  done  nothing  of  their 
'  own   here,   yet  there   they  come   ad  torme?ita,   to 

s  Annot.  in  Matth.  cap.  xix.  14. 
t  Part  i.  ch.  15.  sect.  3.  §.  2. 

u  Lib.  ix.  Exposit.  Moral,  in  Job.  cap.  16.  [c.  21.  torn.  i.  p.  303. 
edit.  Benedict.] 


Opinion  of  Fulgentius,  Gregory/,  Sec.  207 

'torments.'     And  a   little  after;  perpetua  tormenta cbaf.vi. 

percipumt,  '  they  undergo  eternal  torments.'  Year  after 

The   same,  or  at   least   the  opinion  of  moderate '^H'' ^p°" 

^  sties. 

torments,  continued  down  to  Anselm's  time  :  for  he  290. 

speaks  thus  on  that  subject  ^  ; '  Though  all  shall 

'  not  be  equally  tormented  in  hell.  For  after  the 
'  day  of  judgment,  there  will  be  no  angel  or  human 
'  person,  but  what  will  .be  either  in  the  kingdom 
'  of  God,  or  else  in  hell.     So  then  the  sin  of  infants 

*  is  less  than  the  sin  of  Adam  :  and  yet  none  can  be 
'  saved  without  that  universal  satisfaction,  by  which 

*  sin,  be  it  great  or  small,  is  to  be  forgiven.' 

Thus  far  it  continued.  But  about  this  time  the 
doctrine  of  the  church  of  Rome  and  the  western 
world  took  a  great  turn  in  this  point :  and  they 
came  over  to  the  opinion  of  the  Greek  doctors  that 
I  mentioned.  For  Peter  Lombard,  anno  Dom.  1150, 1050. 
determines -\  that  the  proper  punishment  of  original 
sin  (where  there  is  no  actual  sin  added  to  it)  is 
pwna  damni,  non  poena  sensus,  '  the  punishment 
'  of  loss,  (viz.  loss  of  heaven  and  the  sight  of  God,) 
'  but  not  the  punishment  of  sense,  viz.  of  positive 
'  torment.' 

Pope  Innocent  the  third  confirms  this,  by  deter- 1 100. 
mining '-   that   the    'punishment    of   original    sin    is 

*  carentia  visiofiis  Dei,  being  deprived  of  the  sight 
'of  God  :  and  of  actual  sin  the  punishment  to  be 
'  gehennts  perpetuce  cruciatus,  the  torments  of  an 
'  everlasting  hell.' 

^  Lib.  de  conceptione  Virginis  et  peccato  originali,  cap.  22. 

>'  Lib.  2.  Sentent.  Distinct.  33. 

^  Decret.  lib.  3.  cap.  de  Baptismo,  can.  Majores. 


208  The  Schoolmen's  Limbus  Puerorum. 

CHAP. VI.      Then  Alexander  de  Ales^  and  Aquinas%  and  so 

Year  after  the  whole  troop  of  schoohnen,  do  establish  the  same 

sties^^°'      ^y  their  determination.     They  suppose   there   is   a 

I '3°- place  or    state    of  hell   or   hades,  which   they   call 

limbus,    or    mfernus    puerorum,    where    unbaptized 

infants  will  be  in  no  other  torment  or  condemnation 

but  the  loss  of  heaven. 

But  they  did  not  know  what  to  do  with  that 
authority  of  the  book  de  Fide  ad  Petrum  which  I 
mentioned,  and  which  they  took  to  be  St.  Austin's, 
which  says  ;  '  We  must  believe  most  firmly,  and 
'  make  no  question  of  it,  that  they  are  tormented 
'  with  eternal  fire.'  Yet  see  the  power  of  distinc- 
tions.    Alexander  de  Ales  answers ^  'To  be  punish- 

*  ed  with  that  fire  may  be  understood  two  ways  : 
'  either  on  account  of  the  heat  of  it,  or  of  the  dark- 
'  ness  of  it.  They  that  have  actual  sins  will  be 
'  punished  with  the  heat :  but  the  other,  only  with 

*  the  darkness  of  it,  as  wanting  the  sight  of  God,' 
&c.  Now  darkness  without  heat  is,  one  would 
think,  but  improperly  expressed  by  fire.  But  he 
says,  (and  true  enough,)  '  that  if  we  do  not  under- 
'  stand  it  so,  it  will  be  contrary  to  what  St.  Austin 
'  says  at  other  places  of  the  mildness  of  their 
'  punishment.' 

This  was,  as  I  said,  the  general  opinion  of  the 
schoolmen.     Yet    Gregorius    Ariminensis  ^  (who    is 

'^  Summa,  part.  2.  Qusest.  122.  membr.  10. 

^  Parte  tertia,  Quaest.  i.  Art.  4. 

^  Loco  citato. 

c  Lib.  2.  Distinct.  31.  Qusest.  3.  [See  Gregorius  de  Arimino 
in  primo  et  secundo  sententiarum,  fol.  Venetiis  1503.  part.  ii. 
fol.  104,  &c.] 


The  Schoolmen  s  Limbus  Pueioiuni.  209 

called  the  tormenter  of  children)  and  Driedo '\  ^i^.cuw.Yi. 
deavoiired  to  revive  the  opinion  of  Fulgentius  :  but  Year  after 
found  no  followers,  after  that  the  other  opinion  hadsUes?^'°" 
been    countenanced.     The   doctrine   of  eternal   tor- 1260. 
ments  finds  a  difficulty  in  sinking  into  men's  belief, 
(if  they  have  considered  what  eternity  is,)  when  it 
is  applied  to  the  case  of  wicked  men.     Much  more 
in  the  case  of  infants,  who  have  in  their  own  person 
not  known  or   committed  good    or  evil,   and   have 
only  the  stain  of  nature.     And  our  Saviour,  speaking 
of  grown  men,  says,  Thei/  shall  he  beaten   with  few 
stripes,   if  they    he    ignorant  persotis,    and   such    as 
knew    not    their    masters    will.      How    nmch    more 
must  that  rule  hold  in  the  case  of  infants,  who  never 
were  capable  of  any  sense  at  all  about  it ! 

Dr.  Field,  in  his  book  of  the  churchy  is  pleased  to 
call  this  opinion  of  the  schools  a  Pelagian  conceit. 
But  I  have  proved  that  it  is  elder,  especially  in  the 
Greek  church,  than  Pelagius ;  and  w^as  held  by 
those  that  acknowledged  original  corruption  :  which 
corruption,  they  confessed,  carried  with  it,  in  un- 
baptized  persons,  condemnation.  But  they  thought 
the  loss  of  heaven  for  ever  was  that  condemnation  ; 
and  that  when  there  was  no  actual  sin  in  the  case, 
there  would  no  positive  punishment,  or  a  very 
gentle  one,  be  added.  They  thought  that  that  alone 
made  a  mighty  difference  between  infants  baptized, 
and  those  that  die  unbaptized  ;  that  the  one  should 
enter    into    the    kingdom    of    heaven,     the    other 

'^  Lib.  i.  de  gratia  et  libero  arbitrio,  tract.  3.  [See  Joannis 
Driedonis  a  Turnhout  Opera,  torn.  iii.  fol.  69,  &c.  fol.  Lovanii 
1552 — 1556-  The  author  was  professor  of  divinity  in  the  uni- 
versity of  Louvain.]] 

^  Lib.  iii.  Appendix. 

WALL,   VOL.   U.  P 


210  The  Schoolmen'' s  Limbus  Puerorum. 

CHAP.vi.  eternally  miss  of  it :  according  to  that  sentence  of 
Year  after  ^^^^  Saviour  before  mentioned,  John  iii.  5. 
!ties^^°  This  opinion  of  no  positive  punishment,  or  a  very 

gentle  one,  was  afterward  so  general,  that  when 
the  contrary  one  was  anew  set  up  by  the  protest- 
ants,  it  was  by  some  adjudged  to  be  heresy.  For 
Father  Paul,  in  giving  an  account  how  the  council 
of  Trent  ^  prepared  their  decrees  about  original  sin, 
(which  were  determined  in  the  fifth  session,  June  17^ 
1446. 1546,)  mentions  their  disputes  among  themselves, 
whether  they  should  condemn  as  heretical  that  pro- 
position of  the  Lutherans,  '  that  the  punishment 
'  for  original  sin  is  hell  fire :'  and  says  it  missed 
very  narrowly  being  anathematized :  it  was  only 
out  of  respect  to  St.  Austin  and  Gregorius  Ari- 
minensis  that  they  forbore.  The  good  Fathers 
doubtless  mistook,  as  well  as  other  men,  Fulgentius' 
book  for  St.  Austin's ;  so  that  the  blow  had  in  great 
measure  missed  him  :  but  by  what  I  produced 
before  out  of  pope  Gregory  the  first,  '  They  shall 
'  undergo  eternal  torments ;'  it  appears  that  they 
were  nigh  doing  a  greater  mischief.  There  wanted 
but  an  ace  but  they  had  branded  one  of  the  most 
renowned  bishops  of  the  infallible  see  for  a  heretic. 
A  shot  that  would  have  recoiled  on  themselves. 

VII.  All  mentioned  hitherto  have  taken  for  grant- 
ed that  there  is  no  hope  of  such  infants  entering  the 
kingdom  of  heaven  :  only  they  differ  about  their 
positive  punishment,  or  the  degree  of  it.  But  some 
others  have  conceived  hopes  of  their  obtaining  that 
also  in  one  case :  which  is,  when  the  parents,  being 
good  Christians,  do  in   heart   and  purpose  dedicate 

f  History  of  the  Council  of  Trent,  book  ii.  [page  167,  168, 
edit.  Brent.  London,  fol.  1676.] 


The  Opinion  of  Hincmarus.  211 

their  ciiikl   to  God,  and  pray   for  it,  and   do  their  chap.vl 
best  endeavour  to  get  it  baptized  ;  but  are  prevented  Year  after 
by  its  sudden  death.  J^^^p''- 

I  have  taken  some  pains  (more  perhaps  than  such 
a  particular  thing  deserves)  to  find  who  was  the 
first  that  ventured  to  declare  this  charitable  opinion, 
after  it  had  been  so  decried  by  the  ancients,  and 
recanted  by  Vincentius.  I  find  none  elder  than 
Hincmarus  archbishop  of  Rhemes,  anno  Dom.  860. 760. 
who  expressed  such  hopes ;  but  it  Avas  in  a  case 
that  was  very  particular.  A  certain  rash  and  stub- 
born bishop  in  his  province,  named  Hincmarus  too, 
bishop  of  Laudun,  had  excommunicated  all  his 
clergy,  so  that  there  was  nobody  to  give  baptism, 
absolution,  or  burial.  The  archbishop  writes  a 
severe  reproof  to  him  ^,  and  in  it  takes  occasion  to 
speak  of  the  fate  of  such  infants,  as  had  in  the 
meantime  died  without  baptism ;  hoping  that  they 
by  Cod's  extraordinary  mercy  might  be  saved, 
though  he  had  done  what  lay  in  him  for  their 
perishing.  He  argues  thus ;  '  As  in  the  case  of 
"  infants  that  are  under  the  o^uilt  of  the  sin  of  na- 
'  ture,  that  is,  the  sins  of  others  ;  the  faith  of  others, 
'  that  is,  of  their  godfathers  that  answer  for  them 
'  in  baptism,  is  a  means  of  their  salvation  :  so  also 
'  to  those  infants  to  whom  you  have  caused  bap- 
'  tism  to  be  denied,  the  faith  and  godly  desire  of 
'  their  parents  or  godfathers,  who  in  sincerity  de- 
'  sired  baptism  for  them,  but  obtained  it  not ;  may 
'  be  a  help  (or  profit)  by  the  gift  of  him  whose 
'  Spirit  (which  gives  regeneration)  breathes  where 
'  it  pleases.'  I  have  occasion  to  mention  this  Hinc- 
marus of  Laudun   again  in   the  next  chapter,  §.1. 

&  Opusculum  55.  capitulorum,  cap.  48. 

p  2 


212  The  Opinion  of  Hincmarus. 

CHAP.  VI.  because  Dan  vers,  reading  somewhere  that  his  metro- 

Year  after  politan    reproved   him  for   suffering  infants    to    die 

sties^^"'      unbaptized,    concluded    that    he    was    doubtless    a 

bishop  for  his  turn. 

1155.      Then   for    the    case    of  an    infant    dying   in    the 

womb,  the  schoolmen  before  mentioned,  Alex.de  Ales 

and   Aquinas,  do  say  ^,  that   '  such   an  infant  being 

'  subject  to  no  action  of  man,  but  of  God  only  ;  he 

'  may  have  ways   of  saving  it   for   ought  we  know.' 

They  extend  this  no  further  than  to  the  case  of  a 

stillborn  infant :  though  the  reason  seems  much  the 

same   for  one  that   dies  before   he  can  possibly  be 

baptized. 

Vossius  brings  in  St.  Bernard  ',  Petrus  Blesensis, 
Hugo  de  Sancto  Victore,  and  even  St.  Austin  him- 
self, as  asserting  a  possibility  of  salvation,  and  the 
kingdom  of  heaven,  without  baptism :  and  he  seems 
to  understand  this  their  assertion  to  extend  to  the 
case  of  infants.  But  the  places  of  St,  Austin  and 
Bernard  are  no  other  than  those  I  recited  at  §.  4  of 
this  chapter :  which  do  expressly  exclude  infants, 
and  speak  only  of  grown  men,  whose  actual  faith 
and  desire  of  baptism  makes  amends  for  the  want 
of  it  where  it  cannot  be  had.  And  the  places  in  the 
other  two,  Blesensis  and  Hugo,  do,  if  one  examine 
them,  speak  to  no  other  purpose. 

The  next  therefore  that  I  know  of,  that  has  any 
favourable  opinion,  or  rather  suspends  all  opinion, 
of  the  case  of  such  infants,  is  our  WicklifFe  :  whose 
words  are  these  ^'  ;  '  When  an  infant  of  believers  is 

h   Part.  iii.  Qutest.  68.  Art.  i  i. 

'  De  Baptismo,  Disp.  7.  Thesi.  22,  23.  [Op.  torn.  vi.  p.  281.] 
^  Trialog.  lib.  iv.  cap.  1 1 .      [See  Joannis   Wiclefi  Dialogorum 
libri   quatuor,    40.  sine  loco,     1523.   fol.    118,    119. — This    rare 


Wickliffes  Opinion  of  iinhaptized  Infants.  213 

'  brought  to  cliiircb,  that  according  to  Christ's  rule  chap. vi, 
'  he  may  be  baptized  ;  and  the  M-ater  or  some  other  vear  after 
'  requisite  is  wanting;  and  the  people's  pious  inten- ^'^j^j'P"' 

*  tion  continuing,  he  dies  in  the  meantime  naturally 

*  by  the  will  of  God  :  it  seems  hard  to  define  posi- 

*  tively  the  damnation  of  such  an  infant ;  when  nei- 

*  ther  the  infant  nor  the  people  have  sinned,  that  he 
'  should  be  damned.  Where  then  is  the  merciful 
'  liberality  of  Christ  T  &c. 

Then  he  discourses  some  things  preparatory  to 
his  answer,  too  large  to  repeat  here  :  but  his  answer 
is  this ;  chap.  xii.  '  And  by  this,  I  answer  your  third 
'  objection,  granting  that  God,  if  he  will,  may  damn 
'  such  an  infant,  and  do  him  no  wrong;  and  if  he 
'  will,  he  can  save  him :  and  I  dare  not  define  either 
'  part.     Nor    am    I    careful    about    reputation,    or 

*  getting  evidence  in  the  case ;  but  as  a  dumb  man 
'  am  silent,  humbly  confessing  my  ignorance,  using 

*  conditional  words  :   because  it  is  not  clear  to  me 

*  whether  such  an  infant  shall  be  saved  or  damned. 
'  But  I  know  that  whatever  God  does  in  it  will  be 
'  just,  and  a  work  of  mercy  to  be  praised  of  all  the 
'  faithful.'  Then  he  calls  them  presumptuous  that 
of  their  own  authority  define  any  thing  in  this  case. 
He  counts  it  rash  to  determine  their  damnation : 
and,  on  the  other  side,  says,  '  he  that  says,  "  that  in 
'  this  case  put,  an  infant  shall  be  saved,  as  is  pious 
'  to  believe,"  puts  himself  more  than  needs,  or  will 
'  profit  him,  upon  an  uncertainty.'  In  the  next 
chapter  he  handles  the  degree  of  their  punishment 
in    case   they   be   damned :    and    he    determines    it 

piece  was  reprinted  (according  to  Brunet,)  at  Frankfort  in  1753, 
and  at  Bareuth  in  1754-] 


214  Wickliffe's  Opinion  of  unhaptized  Infants. 

CHAP.vi.  contrary  to  the  schools,  that  it  will  be  not  only  loss 

Year  after  of  heaven,  but  Sensible  punishment. 

sties!^"'  I^  ^^  ^^  ^^  noted,  that  he  had  spoke  his  mind  before 
of  the  state  of  infants  that  are  baptized,  as  being 
out  of  danger.  For  in  chap,  xii,  having  discoursed 
of  three  sorts  of  baptism  ;  viz.  of  water,  of  blood, 
and  of  the  Spirit ;  and  that  the  third  is  the  chief; 
and  that  God,  for  ought  we  know,  may  sometimes 
grant  that  without  the  other  :  he  adds,  '  Reputamus 
'  tamen  absque  dubietate,  quod  infantes  recte  baptizati 
'  flumine,  sint  baptizati  tertio  baptismate,  cum  ha- 
'  bent  gratiam  baptismalem.'  '  But  we  hold  that  to  be 
'  without  doubt,  that  infants  that  are  rightly  bap- 
'  tized  with  water,  are  baptized  with  the  third  bap- 
'  tism,  [viz.  that  of  the  Spirit,]  when  as  [or  seeing 
'  that]  they  have  the  baptismal  grace.' 

This  last  I  note,  because  Mr.  Danvers'  had  brought 
this  man  for  one  of  his  witnesses  against  infant- 
baptism  ;  taking  a  great  deal  of  pains  to  shew  how 
great  a  man  Wickliffe  was.  And  what  is  worse,  he 
had  cited  some  passages  out  of  this  book,  and  these 
very  chapters ;  taking  here  and  there  a  scrap,  which 
by  itself  might  seem  to  make  for  his  purpose. 

IMr.  Baxter"^  to  answer  him  and  vindicate  Wick- 
liffe, transcribed  the  whole  passage  of  the  length  of 
several  pages.  A  thing  that  is  tedious,  but  yet 
necessary  in  answering  such  quoters.  '  And  now 
'  reader  judge,'  says  Mr.  Baxter,  '  what  a  sad  case 
'  poor,  honest,  ignorant  Christians  are  in,  that  must 
'  have  their  souls  seduced,  troubled,  and   led  into 

'  separations,  &c.  by  such  a  man, when  a  man  as 

'  pleading  for  Christ    and    baptism    dare,   not   only 

'  Treatise  of  Baptism,  part  ii.  ch.  7.  p.  280.  edit.  2. 
'•^   More  Proofs,  part  iii.  p.  353. 


Wichliffe^s  Opinion  of  linhaptized  Infants.  215 

*  print  such  things,  but  stand  to  them  in  a  second  chap.vi. 
'  edition,  and  defend  them  by  a  second  book.'  Vear  after 

But  all  this  did  no  good  upon  him.     For  that  he  ^J',^,"''''" 
might  shew   himself  the  most  tenacious   man   that 
ever  lived,  of  what  he  had  once  said,  he  does  in  an- 
other reply"  after  that,  go  about  with  a  great  many 
words  to  maintain  his  point. 

I  shall  be  so  civil  to  my  reader  as  to  take  for 
granted  that  the  words  of  Wickliffe  here  given, 
though  but  a  small  part  of  those  produced  by  Mr. 
Baxter,  do  satisfy  him  :  for  if  an  author  give  his 
opinion  in  plain  words,  that  all  baptized  infants  are 
in  a  state  of  salvation ;  but  make  a  question  of 
those  that  die  unbaptized,  whether  they  can  be 
saved  or  not ;  and  do  also  speak  of  the  baptizing  of 
an  infant  as  being  according  to  Christ's  rule,  and 
do  call  the  people's  intention  of  doing  it  a  pious 
hitention :  one  needs  no  plainer  account  of  his 
approving  it.  If  Wickliffe  had  ever  spoke  a  word 
against  the  baptizing  of  infants,  the  council  of  Con- 
stance would  not  have  failed  in  those  forty-five  1.5 15. 
articles  drawn  up  against  him,  after  his  death,  to 
have  objected  that  ;  for  they  commonly  overdo  that 
work :  whereas  they  object  nothing  about  baptism ; 
and  what  others  object  is,  that  he  gave  hopes  that 
some  unbaptized  infants  might  come  to  heaven. 

The  same  thing  appears  in  the  tenets  of  AVickliife's 
scholars  that  survived  him.  For  Foxe,  in  his  Mar- 
tyrology^  recites  out  of  the  register  of  the  church 
of  Hereford,  a  declaration  of  faith  made  by  one 
Walter  Brute,  a  scholar  of  Wickliffe,  examined 
before  the  bishop  of  Hereford,  anno  Dom.  1393.  in '293. 

n  [See  Danvers'  Second  Reply,  8".  1675.  p.  ^  20,  &c.] 
°  Second  edition,  vol.  i.  p.  453. 


216  The  Lollards'  and  Hussites''  Opinion. 

CHAP. VI.  which  he  says,  '  I  greatly  marvel  at  that  saying  in 
Year  after  '  ^^^®  clecrees  which  is  ascribed  to  Austin,  that  little 
the  apo-      <  children  that  are  not  baptized  shall  be  tormented 

sties.  _  ^ 

*  with  eternal  fire,  although  they  were  born  of 
'  faithful   parents,  who  wished   them  with  all  their 

'  hearts  to  have  been  baptized. How  shall  the 

'  infant  be  damned  that  is  born  of  faithfid  parents 
'  that  do  not  despise,  but  rather  desire  to  have  their 

1305' children  baptized?'  &c.  And  afterward,  in  the 
time  of  Henry  IV,  one  of  the  articles  usually  en- 
joined for  the  Lollards,  who  were  the  disciples  of 
Wickliffe,  to  recant,  was,  as  FoxeP  recites  it,  this; 
'  that  an  infant,  though  he  die  unbaptized,  shall  be 

*  saved.'  But  there  is  no  such  thing  in  Foxe,  as 
Dan  vers*!  would  prove  out  of  a  book  he  calls  Dutch 
Martyrology,  that  one  Clifford  informed  the  arch- 
bishop, that  a  liollard,  if  he  had  a  child  new-born, 
would  not  have  him  baptized.     Foxe  does  indeed 

1328.  tell*"  how  a  good  while  after,  in  the  time  of  Henry VI, 
some  Lollards  of  Norfolk  had,  among  other  articles, 
this   objected   to   them ;  that   they   held   or  taught, 

*  that  Christian  people  be  sufficiently  baptized  in  the 
'  blood  of  Christ,  and  need  no  water :  and  that  in- 
'  fants  be  sufficiently  baptized,  if  their  parents  be 
'  baptized  before  them  :  and  that  the  sacrament 
'  of  baptism  used  in  the  chnrch  by  water  is  but 
'  a  light  matter  and  of  small  effect.'  But  he 
shews  at  the  same  place,  that  in  all  probabi- 
lity both  this  and  several  other  of  the  articles 
charged  on  them,  were  by  the  informers  altered  in 
words  from  what  they  had  said,  on  purpose  to  make 
them  odious:  which  was  the  constant  vein   of  the 

P  Second  edition,  vol.  i.  p.  485. 

4  Treatise,  part  ii.  ch.  7.  [p.  303.]         '  Foxe^  as  above,  p.  6c8. 


The  Lollard&'  and  Hussites'  Opinion.  217 

po]iish  accusers  of  those  times.      Wieklifte  bad  said,  chap. vi. 
that  the  water  itself,   without   the  baptism   of  the  year  after 
Spirit,  is  of  little  efficacy.     And  he  and  his  followers '^',^ ''P"- 
had  said,   that   if   the   parents    be  good  Christians, 
and  pray  for  their  child,  there  is  hoj^e  that  it  may 
be  saved,  though  it  do  by  some  sudden  chance  die 
before  it  can  be  baptized.     And  if  these  men  said 
no  more  than   so,  yet    that  was    enough    for    their 
adversaries  to  frame  such  a  slanderous  information. 
But   if  we  suppose  that  they  did  really  hold  what 
was  objected,  then  they  were  not  of  the  antip^edo- 
baptist  opinion,  (as  Danvers,  by  altering  the  words 
something  the    other   way,   would    represent ^)    but 
of  the  humour  of  the  Quakers,  to  slight  all  water- 
baptism. 

The  Hussites  also  in  Bohemia  had  the  same  hope- 1350. 
ful  opinion,  viz.  that  infants  dying  unbaptized  may 
be  saved  by  the  mercy  of  God,  accepting  their 
parents'  faithful  desire  of  baptizing  them  for  the 
deed  :  as  appears  by  their  history,  both  in  Foxe*  and 
the  writers  from  whom  he  copies.  And  this  was 
objected  to  them  as  an  error  by  the  papists  there, 
as  it  was  to  the  Lollards  here.  Indeed  they  were 
disciples  of  our  Wicklifl'e  as  Avell  as  the  Lollards. 
For  John  Huss,  the  first  reformer  there,  imbibed  1395. 
the  sense  of  religion  which  he  had  from  Wickliffe's 
books  ;  and  took  this  principle  among  the  rest. 

Nay,  even  in  the  church  of  Rome  some  doctors 
have  shewn  a  great  inclination  to  this  opinion,  and 
have  expressed  it  as  far  as  they  durst.  Cassander 
quotes  Gerson,  Biel,  Cajetan,  and  some  others,  as 
expressing  some  hopes  in  this  case,  and  encouragino- 
the  parents  of  such  children  to  pray  for  them.     But 

s  Treatise,  part  ii.  ch.  7.  [page  304.]        t  ,\t  the  year  141 5. 


2]  8  Some  Doctors  of  the  Church  of  Rome. 

CHAP. VI.  I  doubt  that  Gerson  and  Biel  do  mean  only  such 
Year  after  infawts  as  die  in  the  womb  ;  which  amounts  to  no 
gtig,^^°'  more  than  what  the  old  schoolmen  had  said,  as  I 
shewed.  Yet  Gerson's  words  are  ambiguous  :  I  will 
'3'Sset  them  down.  He  had  been  observina'"  that  God 
does  not  always  tack  his  mercy  to  the  sacraments  : 
and  thereupon  advises  '  women  great  with  child, 
'  and  their  husbands,  to  use  their  prayers  for  their 
*  infant  that  is  not  yet  born,  that  (if  it  be  to  die  be- 
'  fore  it  can  come  to  the  grace  of  baptism  with  water) 
'  the  Lord  Jesus  would  vouchsafe  to  sanctify  it 
'  beforehand  Mith  the  baptism  of  his  holy  Spirit. 
'  F'or  who  knows  but  that  God  may  perhaps  hear 
'  them  ?  Nay,  who  would  not  devoutly  hope,  that 
'  he  will  not  despise  the  prayer  of  his  humble  ser- 
'  vants  that  trust  in  him  ?  This  consideration  is 
'  useful  to  raise  devotion  in  the  parents,  and  to  ease 
'  their  trouble  of  mind,  if  the  child  die  without 
'  baptism ;  forasmuch  as  all  hope  is  not  taken  away. 
'  But  yet  there  is,  I  confess,  no  certainty  without  a 
'  revelation.' 

This  is  part  of  a  sermon  preached  before  the 
council  of  Constance,  where  Huss  was  condemned 
and  martyred.  And  one  error  whereof  Huss  was 
accused  was,  that  he  held  the  salvation  of  infants, 
that  by  mischance  die  unbaptized.  Therefore  if 
Gerson  mean  this  of  children  born  alive,  it  shews 
that  he  was  of  another  temper  than  the  rest  of  that 
bloody  popish  council. 
M2S-  Cardinal  Cajetan  was  another  of  the  better  sort 
of  papists  ;  and  he''  ventures  to  say  of  children  that 

"  Serm.  de  Nativitate  Mariee  V^irginis,  Consid.  2.  [Op.  torn.  iii. 
p    1350,  edit.  I  706.] 

X  In  tertiam  partem  Thomye,  Qusest.  68.  Art.  1.  et  2. 


Some  Doctors  of  the  Church  of  Rome.  219 

die  after  they  are  born,  and  yet  before  they  can  be  chap.  vi. 
baptized,  that  '  it  is  not  unreasonable  to  say,  that  Year  after 
*■  baptism  in  the  desire  of  the  parents  is  in  such  case  ^^'j^j'P'*" 
'  of  necessity  sufficient  for  their  salvation  :'  but  says, 
he  s])eaks  '  under    correction.'     And    he    has    been 
corrected.     For    some    doctors    have  called    him   a 
heretic  ^  for  this  :  others,  that  are  not  so  severe,  yet 
say  it  is  an  erroneous   and   rash   opinion    to    think 
this  to  be  possible.     Indeed  the  council  of  Florence  1339- 
had   determined,  that  '  the  souls  of  all  that  die  in 
'  actual  mortal  sin,  or  even  in  original  sin  alone,  do 
'  go   ad  infernum,  to  hell.'     I   suppose   they  mean 
that  infants  go  to  that  part  of  hell  which  they  call 
limhus  puerorum,  where  there  are  no  torments. 

But  above  all,  Cassander  himself  has  shewn  a  147c. 
very  compassionate  temper,  in  the  pains  he  has 
taken  to  encourage  parents  to  some  hopes,  and  to 
earnest  prayers  for  their  child  so  dying^.  But 
withal  a  very  modest  one,  when  he  adds  these 
words ;  '  This  opinion  of  mine  concerning  infants, 
'  I  will  not  defend  with  contention  or  obstinacy : 
'  nor  rashly  condemn  those,  who  being  persuaded 
'  by  the  authority  of  the  ancients,  and  of  almost 
'  the  whole  church,  do  allow  salvation  to  those  in- 
'  fants  only,  to  whom  God,  in  his  secret  but  just 
'  judgment,  does  vouchsafe  the  sacrament  of  rege- 
'  neration  and  baptism.' 

VIII.  Upon  the  reformation,  the  protestants 
generally  have  defined  that  the  due  punishment 
of  original  sin  is,  in  strictness,  damnation  in  hell. 
I  suppose  and  hope  that  they  mean  with  St.  Austin, 

5' Vasquez  in  tertiam  partem  Thonue,  tom.  2.  Disp.  141. 
cap.  3. 

^  Dc  Raptismo  Infanthini.  [Op.  p.  778.  edit.  Paris.  1616.] 


220  Some  Doctors  of  the  Church  of  Rome. 

CHAP.vi.a  very  moderate  degree  of  it  in  the  case  of  infants, 
Year  after  ^'^  wliom  Original  corruption,  which  is  the  fomes 
the  apo-      QY  gourco  of  all  wickedness,  has  not  broke  out  into 

sties. 

any  actual  sin. 

But  if  their  doctrine  has  in  this  respect  been 
more  ri<>id  than  that  of  the  church  of  Rome,  or  of 
the  ancient  Greek  doctors ;  they  have  in  another 
respect,  viz.  in  the  case  of  Christian  people's  chil- 
dren, given  such  a  mitigating  explication  of  our 
Saviour's  words,  as  to  allow  better  hopes  than 
either  of  them.  For  they  do  generally  incline  to 
think,  that  if  a  child  by  misfortune  die  before  it 
can  have  baptism,  the  parents'  sincere  intention  of 
giving  it,  and  their  prayers,  will  be  accepted  with 
God  for  the  deed ;  and  will  be  available  to  procure 
of  God's  mercy  pardon  of  original  sin,  and  even  an 
entrance  into  the  kingdom.  Whereas  the  school- 
men and  Fathers  have  thought  that  Christ  at  the 
day  of  judgment  will  proceed  by  that  sentence, 
John  iii.  3,  5,  (such  an  one  cannot  enter  into  the 
kingdom  of  God,)  in  the  manner  that  a  judge  in 
a  court  of  common  law  ])roceeds  upon  the  words  of 
a  statute,  having  no  power  to  make  allowance  for 
circumstances :  the  protestants  do  hope  that  he  will 
act  in  the  manner  that  a  judge  of  a  court  of  equity 
does,  who  has  power  to  mitigate  the  letter  of  the 
law  in  cases  where  reason  would  have  it.  The 
Fathers  themselves  thought  this  allowance  would 
be  made  in  the  case  of  a  grown  man,  who  had  a 
personal  desire  of  baptism :  and  that  if  it  was  an 
invincible  necessity  that  kept  him  from  water,  he 
might  enter  the  kingdom  without  being  horn  of 
water.  The  protestants  think  the  same  in  the  case 
of  the  desire  of  the   parent  for   his   infant.     They 


Some  Doctors  of  the  Church  of  Rome.  2^1 

think  thus;  the  main  thing  in  Clod's  intention  in  chap.  vi. 
this  case  is,  that  a  parent,  as  he  dedicates  himself  ^-ear  after 
to  God,  so  he  should  likewise  dedicate  his  child,  ^^'j^^^p''' 
and  get  him  entered  into  that  covenant  made  in 
Christ,  without  which  there  is  no  hoi)e  of  heaven  : 
and  that  he  should  accordingly  make  use  of  that 
symbol  or  outward  sign  which  God  has  appointed 
to  be  the  way  of  admission  into  that  covenant, 
if  he  can  ])ossible  :  and  that  his  refusal  to  do  the 
latter  will  be  looked  on  as  a  refusal  of  the  cove- 
nant itself.  But  that  if,  notwithstanding  his  sincere 
desire  and  endeavour  of  obtaining  the  outward 
symbol,  he  be  by  some  accident  disappointed  of  it; 
God  will  vet  o-rant  the  same  favour  that  he  had 
promised  upon  the  use  of  it :  because  it  is  the  heart 
that  God  regards ;  and  where  that  is  ready,  outward 
things  are  accepted  according  to  what  a  man  Jiath^ 
and  not  according  to  what  he  hath  not:  especially 
if  some  act  of  God  himself,  as  the  sudden  death  of 
the  infant,  &c.,  do  render  it  impossible  for  him  to 
have  them. 

Luther  and  his  followers  do  indeed  speak  more 
doubtfully  of  this:  and  do  lay  so  much  stress  on 
actual  baptism,  as  that  they  allow  a  layman  to  do 
the  office  in  times  of  necessity,  rather  than  that 
the  infant  should  die  without  it. 

But  Calvin,  and  those  that  follow  him,  (who  to 
the  great  prejudice  of  religion  made  a  needless 
schism  from  the  others,  or  else  the  others  from 
them,  I  know  not  which,)  sunk  the  doctrine  of  the 
necessity  of  baptism  a  pitch  loMer.     They  own*^  that 

a  Calvini  Antidotum  ad  acta  Synodi  Tridentinse,  sess.  7. 
Canon. 5.  item  Antidotum  ad  Articulos  Parisienses,  Art.i.  item 
Institut.  lib.iv.  cap.  15.  §.22.      [The  first   of  these  pieces  was 


222  The  Protestaiifs,  Lutherans, 

CHAP.  VI.  baptism  is  necessary  not  only  necessitate  pr(Ece2)ti,  by 
\'ear  after  Gocl's  Command,  but  also  thus  far,  yiecesdtate  medii, 
theapo.  ^Yi^^  it  is  God's  ordiuaij  means  to  regenerate  and 
give  salvation.  But  they  determine  it  as  a  thing 
certain,  that  the  child  of  a  godly  believing  parent 
shall  obtain  the  kingdom  of  heaven,  though  he  do 
by  sudden  death,  &c.,  miss  of  baptism :  '  provided 
'  this  happen  by  no  negligence  or  contumacy  of  the 

*  parent.'  And  they  deny  that  there  is  or  can  be 
any  such  necessity  as  to  justify  a  layman's  giving  it. 
And  Calvin  takes  an  occasion  to  jeer  some  papists'' 
that  had  said  that  '  if  a  child  be  like  to  die,  and  no 
'  water  to  be  had  but  what  is  in  the  bottom  of  a 
'  deep  well,  and  nothing  to  draw  with  :  the  best 
'  way  is  to  throw  the  child  down  into  the  well,  that 
'  it  may  be  washed  before  it  be  dead.' 

The  church  of  England  have  declared  their  sense 
of  the  necessity,  by  reciting  that  saying  of  our 
Saviour,  John  iii.  5,  both  in  the  office  of  baptism 
of  infants,  and  also  in  that  for  those  of  riper  years. 
And  in  the  latter  they  add  these  words ;  '  Beloved, 

*  ye  hear  in  this  Gospel  the  express  words  of  our 
'  Saviour  Christ,  that,  E.vcept  a  man  be  born  of 
'  irater  and  of  the  Spirit,  he  cannot  enter  into  the 
'  kingdom  of  God.     Whereby  ye  may  perceive  the 

printed  in  1 2mo,  in  the  year  1547  :  and  the  second  in  1 542  :  (both 
editions  are  excessively  rare  :)  they  are  found  in  the  seventh 
volume  of  the  large  collection  of  his  works,  Geneva,  161 7,  &c., 
and  in  vol.  viii.  of  that  published  at  Antwerp  in  1671.] 

l*  [The  words  of  the  Theological  Faculty  of  Paris  are,  '  Venti- 
'  latur  ardua  qusestio  inter  Doctores,  utrum  infans  in  periculo 
'  mortis,  si  non  adsit  aqua,  debeat  potius  projici  in  puteum  quam 
'  commendari  Deo  cum  expectatione  eventus.  Hoc  autem  esset 
'  homicidium  dignum  morte,  nisi  diceretur  quod  baptisma  sit  de 
'  necessitate  salutis.'] 


Calvinists,  Church  of  England.  22B 

'great  necessity  of  this   sacrament,   where   it   may  chap.  vi. 

*  be    had.'      And    Archbishop  Laud,    shewing    that  vear  after 
infant-baptism    is   proved   from   Scripture,   and   not^^jg^^'P"" 
from  the  tradition  of  the  church  only,  (against  the 
Jesuit,   his   adversary,   who,   to    cast   in    a    bone  of 
contention,  had  asserted  the  latter,)  gives  his  sense 

of  it  thus^  ;  '  That  baptism  is  necessary  to  the  salva- 
'  tion  of  infants  (in  the  ordinary  way  of  the  church, 
'  without  binding  God  to  the  use  and  means  of  that 
'  sacrament,  to  which  he  hath  bound  us)  is  express 

*  in  St.  John  iii.  Ejocept^  &c.' 

Concerning  the  everlasting  state  of  an  infant 
that  by  misfortune  dies  unbaptized,  the  church  of 
England  has  determined  nothing,  (it  were  fit  that  all 
churches  would  leave  such  things  to  God,)  save  that 
they  forbid  the  ordinary  office  for  burial  to  be  used 
for  such  an  one  :  for  that  were  to  determine  the 
point,  and  acknowledge  him  for  a  Christian  brother. 
And  thouo-h  the  most  noted  men  in  the  said  church 
from  time  to  time,  since  the  reformation  of  it  to 
this  time,  have  expressed  their  hopes  that  God  will 
accept  the  purpose  of  the  parent  for  the  deed ;  yet 
they  have  done  it  modestly,  and  much  as  Wickliife 
did,  rather  not  determining  the  negative,  than  abso- 
lutely determining  the  positive,  that  such  a  child 
shall  enter  into  the  kingdom  of  heaven.  Archbishop 
Laud's  w^ords,  we  see,  are  ;  '  We  are  not  to  bind 
'  God,  though  he  hath  bound  us.'  And  archbishop 
Whitgift,  disputing  with  Cartwright,  says,  '  I  do 
'  mislike  as  much  as  you  the  opinion  of  those  that 
'  think    infants    to    be    condemned    wdiich    are    not 

c  Relation  of  the  Conference  between  Archbishop  Laud  and 
Mr.  Fisher,  §.  xv.  nv.m.  4. 


224  Presbyterians,  Aiitlpcedohaptists. 

CHAP.vi. '  baptizecH.'  All  this  is  modest.  But  there  are 
Year  after  indeed  some,  that  do  make  a  pish  at  any  one  that 
theapo-  jj^  j-^q|.  confident,  or  does  speak  with  any  reserve 
about  that  matter;  and  they  desi)ise  him  and  his 
scruples  as  much,  and  with  as  much  success,  as 
Vincentius  the  talkative  did  those  of  St.  Austin 
on  the  same  point  ®. 

For  the  opinion  of  the  English  presbyterians,  T 
shall  content  myself  with  citing  these  M^ords  of 
jMr.  Baxter ;  '  I  have  hereby  been  made  thankful 
'  that  God  has  kept  me  from  the  snare  of  anabap- 
'  tistry.  For  though  I  lay  not  so  much  as  some 
'  do  on  the  mere  outward  act  or  water  of  baptism, 

*  believino'  that  our  heart-consent  and  dedication 
'  qualifieth  infants  for  a  covenant-right  before  actual 
'  baptism,  (which  yet  is  Christ's  regular  solemniza- 
'  tion  and  investiture,)  yet  I  make  a  great  matter 
'of  the  main  controversy:  notwithstanding  that  I 
'  hereticate  not  the  anabaptists  for  the  bare  opinion's 

*  sake,  nor  would  have  them  persecuted  V  &c. 

The  antipoedobaptists,  as  they  allow  no  advantage 
to  an  infant  by  its  baptism,  nor  yet  by  its  being 
the  child  of  a  godly  and  religious  parent;  so  they 
do  not  all  agree  about  the  state  of  infants  dying 
before  actual  sin.  One  sort  of  them  determine 
with  great  assurance,  that  all  infants,  of  heathens 
as  well  as  Christians,  of  the  wicked  as  well  as  of 
the  godly,  shall  be  saved,  and  shall  enter  into  the 

''  Defence  of  the  Answer  to  the  Admonition,  tract  g.  chap.  5. 
Divis.  2.  [p.  516.  edit.  Lond.  1574.] 

>■'   See  part  i.  ch.  20. 

^  Reply  to  Hutchinson,  p.  39.  [i.  e.  Baxter's  Review  of  the 
state  of  Christians'  Infants,  &c.  8vo.  London,  1676.] 


Ml  agree  that  baptized  In/ants,  ^c.  2525 

kingdom   of  God.     And    they   dissuade    men   from<^HAP.vi. 
having   their    children    baptized,   or  born   again   o/" Year  after 
water,  &c.,  seeing   by  this   determination   they  are^^i^j^^"' 
secure  of  heaven  without  it.     To  which  the  other 
commonly   answer,   tliat   they  desire   such   a   safety 
for   their  children,   as    has   some    ground    in   God's 
word,  and  not  in  their  determination  only  :  since  an 
infant  has  no  promise,  right,  or  expectation  of  the 
kingdom  of  heaven,  merely  as  it  is  a  human  creature, 
or  born  of  human  race ;  but  only  as  being  entered 
and  interested  in  the  covenant  of  Christ,  by  which  is 
promised  an    eternal    life   after   this ;  and   the   said 
covenant  does  require,  as  a  condition  of  all  that  are 
to  enter  into  the  kingdom,  that  they  he  bom  again 
of  water,  &c. 

Another  sort  of  antipsedobaptists  have  not  this 
assurance  concerning  all  infants,  but  do  suppose  a 
different  state  of  them  on  account  of  the  decrees  of 
election  and  reprobation. 

IX.  Concerning  the  state  of  a  baptized  infant 
dying  before  actual  sin,  the  whole  Christian  world 
has  agreed  that  it  is  undoubtedly  saved,  and  will 
be  admitted  to  the  joys  of  heaven  :  since  it  has  all 
that  the  church  of  Christ  can  give  it.  St.  Austin 
says,  as  I  shelved  before  ^  '  He  that  does  not  be- 
'  lieve  this  is  an  infidel.'  And,  *  God  forbid  that 
'  we  should  doubt  of  it.'  It  is  certain,  there  was 
never  any  doubt  made  of  it  till  the  times  of  the  late 
managers  of  the  doctrine  of  praedestination.  Some 
of  these  have  added  several  limitations  and  provi- 
soes to  this  proposition,  relating  to  the  election  or 
sanctification  of  the  parents,  or  their  right  to  church 
membership :    and    some   of  them   have   used   such 

?  Part  i.  ch.  15.  sect.  5.  ^.  6. 
WALL,  vol,.  II.  Q 


226  All  agree  that 

CHAP.vi.  expressions,  as  that  they  seem  to  think  that  even 
Year  after  among  the  infants  of  faithful  parents,  some  are  so 
the  apo-  reprobated  by  the  eternal  decree  of  God,  that  though 
they  be  baptized,  and  die  in  infancy,  yet  they  will 
be  damned.  Some  sayings  of  Paraeus,  Perkins, 
Zanchius,  &c.,  are  by  their  adversaries  produced  to 
this  pui-pose^.  And  it  is  known  what  exceptions' 
some  have  taken  at  the  rubric  of  the  last  edition  of 
the  English  liturgy  at  the  end  of  the  office  of  bap- 
tism ;  that  '  it  is  certain  by  God's  word  that  chil- 
'  dren  which  are  baptized,  dying  before  they  commit 
'  actual  sin,  are  undoubtedly  saved.' 

What  enemies  soever  that  assertion  may  have 
now,  it  had  none  in  those  times  of  which  I  am 
writing.  The  maintainers  of  prsedestination  in  those 
days  spoke  thus  of  the  case  of  an  infant  dying 
before  actual  sin ;  that  if  he  was  baptized  before  he 
died,  it  was  thence  manifest  that  he  had  been 
elected  :  if  not,  it  appeared  that  he  was  not  elected. 
Or  thus ;  that  those  infants  which  were  proedesti- 
nated  to  salvation,  came  by  God's  providence  to 
obtain  baptism  :  but  the  others  missed  of  it. 

This  is  plain  in  the  discourses  of  St.  Austin, 
Prosper,  Fulgentius,  &.c.  '  There  are,'  says  St. 
Austin'^,   'two  infants  born:  if  you  ask  what  merit 

h  See  Acta  et  Scripta  Synodalia  Dordracena  Ministrorum 
Remonstrantiuiu,  &c.  in  scriptis  dogmaticis,  p.  45,  46. 

'  [See  '  an  Account  of  all  the  proceedings  of  the  Commis- 
sioners of  both  persuasions  appointed  by  His  Sacred  Majesty, 
for  the  review  of  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer,'  &c.  4to.  London, 
1661.  Particularly  p.  25,  (signature  E)  or  p.  27.  (sign.  E  2.) 
of  another  edition  of  the  same  date  :  also  p.  i  iS,  of  '  the  Papers 
'  that  passed  between  the  Commissioners,'  &c.  ibid.'] 

k  Serm.  de  verbis  Apost.  xi.  [Sermo  xxvi.  cap.  12.  sect.  13. 
in  edit.  Benedict.  Op.  tom.  v.  p.  141.] 


baptized  Infants  are  saved.  227 

'  they  have;  they  both  are  of  the  himp  of  perdition. chap. vi. 
'  But  how  comes  it  that  the  mother  of  the  one  brings  Year  after 
'  him  to  the  grace  (viz.  of  baptism);  the  mother  of^^^^P"- 
'  the  other  in  her  sleep  overhes  it  ?     Yon  will  ask 
'  me,    What    merit    had    one,    that    he    should    be 

*  brought  to  the  grace  ?  What  merit  had  the  other, 
'  that  was  overlaid  by  his  sleeping  mother?  Neither 
'  of  them  deserved   any  good.     But  the  potter  has 

*  power  over  his  day,  of  the  same  lump  to  make  one 
'  vessel  to  honour,  another  to  dishonour.'' 

And  he  puts  a  harder  case  yet.  The  Pelagians, 
who  held  that  the  grace  of  God  is  given  according 
to  men's  merits,  were  urged  by  St.  Austin  to  tell 
what  foregoing  merit  one  infant  that  was  baptized 
and  then  died,  could  have  above  another  that  died 
without  the  grace  of  baptism.  '  If  you  should  say,' 
says  he^  '  that  he  merited  this  by  the  piety  of  his 
'  parents:  you  will  be  answered  ;  Why  then  do  the 
'  children  of  godly  parents  sometimes  miss  of  this 
'  benefit,  and  the  children  of  wicked  parents  obtain 
'  it  ?  Sometimes  a  child  born  of  religious  parents 
'  is  taken  away  as  soon  as  it  is  born,  before  it  be 
'  washed  with  the  laver  of  regeneration  :  and  an 
'  infant  born  of  the  enemies  of  Christ  is,  by  the 
'  compassion  of  some  Christian,  baptized  in  Christ. 
'  A  baptized  and  chaste  mother  bewails  her  own 
'  son  dying  unbaptized ;  and  yet,  finding  another 
'  child  left  in  the  street  by  some  strumpet,  takes  it 
'  up  and  procures  it  to  be  baptized.  Here  for  cer- 
'  tain  the  merits  of  the  parents  can  have  no  place,' 
&c.      He  o'oes  on  to  shew  bv  several  other  reasons 

1  Lib.  ii.  contra   dims  Epistolai?  Pelagianoruni,   cap.  6.      [Op. 
torn.  X.] 

U  2 


228  All  agree  that  baptized  Infants^  <S^c. 

CHAP. VI.  or  instances,  that  it  was  impossible  to  assign  any 
Year  after  ^^^^^  gFound  of  difference,  except  the  free  purpose 
the  apo-      of  God,  '  Why  some  infants  being  baptized  should 
'  obtain,  and   others   dying  unbaptized   should  miss 
'  of,  so  excellent  a  benefit  of  being  made  the  sons 
'  of  God,  without  any  merit  of  their  parents,  or  of 
'  their  own.' 
340-      So  Prosper  (or  be  it  Hilarius,  or  pope  Leo,  that 
was  the  author  of  the  book)  de  Vocatione  Gentium^ 
lib.  i.  c.  7.  challenges  those  who  attributed  the  dif- 
ference that  God  makes  in  calling  one  nation  or  one 
person  to  the  means  of  salvation,  and  not  another, 
to  the  different  use  that  they  had  made  of  freewill, 
to  give  any  tolerable  account  of  the  case  of  infants ; 

*  why   some    being    regenerated,   are   saved ;  others 

'  not  being  regenerated,  do  perish.' *  For  I  sup- 

'  pose,'  says  he,  '  that  these  patrons  of  freewill  will 

*  not  be  so  shameless,  as  either  to  say  that  this  dif- 
'  ference  happens  by  chance ;  or  to  deny,  that  those 
'  that  are  not  regenerated  do  perish.' 

And  those  who  were  at  that  time  (from  the  year 
400!  420  to  500)  the  opposite  party  in  the  church,  to 
those  that  held  this  absolute  election  and  reproba- 
tion, and  were  called  by  the  others  semipelagians, 
as  in  reference  to  the  adult  they  maintained  that 
God  had  elected  those  who  he  foresaw  would  be 
faithful ;  so  for  infants  that  die  in  infancy,  they 
said  ;  that  those  of  them  which  God  foresaw  would 
have  been  godly  if  they  had  lived,  those  he  in  his 
Providence  took  care  should  be  baptized  :  and  those 
that  would  have  been  wicked  if  they  had  lived,  he 
by  some  providence  causes  to  miss  of  baptism.  So 
that   both   these    contrary   parties    agreed    in    this ; 


Prcedestinarians  and  Semipelagians,  229 

that  of  infants  so  dying,  all  the  baptized  ones  were  chap.  vi. 
saved:  and    (as  the  opinion   then  was)  all  the  un- Year  after 
baptized  missed  of  it.  ^^^J^°- 

Of  the  modern  prsedestinarians  or  Calvinists,  if 
some  have  been  so  rigid  as  to  think  that  some  bap- 
tized infants  dying  in  infancy  do  perish  ;  yet  they 
are  not  all  of  that  opinion.  Vossius  allows  it  to  be 
an  infallible  rule  which  is  expressed  in  the  rubric 
aforesaid.  '  It  is,'  says  he  ^>  '  not  the  judgment  of 
'  charity  only,   but  of  charity  that  cannot  be  mis- 

*  taken,  that  we  account  baptized  infants  go  to 
'  heaven,  as  many  of  them  as  die  before  the  use  of 
'  reason,   and  before   they   have  defiled   themselves 

*  with  actual  sins.' 

X.  From  the  last  quoted  place  of  St.  Austin,  one 
may  observe,  that  the  ancients  did  not,  in  the  bap- 
tizing of  children,  go  by  that  rule  which  some 
presbyterians  would  establish,  viz.  that  none  are  to 
be  baptized  but  the  children  of  parents  actually 
godly  and  religious.  For  he  speaks  of  the  case  of  a 
strumpet's  child,  or  a  child  '  born  of  the  enemies  of 
'  Christ,'  viz.  of  heathens,  found  in  the  streets  and 
baptized,  as  a  common  instance.  And  in  his  epistle 
to  Auxilius  ",  a  young  bishop  that  had  rashly  ex- 
communicated a  whole  family  for  the  parents' 
crimes,  he  desires  him  to  shew  a  reason  if  he  can, 
how  a  son,  a  wife,  a  slave,  can  justly  be  excommuni- 
cated for  the  fault  of  the  father,  husband,  master. 
And  then  adds  ;  '  Or  any  one  in  that  family  that  is 
'  not  yet  born,  but  may  be  born  during  the  excom- 

*  munication :  so  that  he  cannot,  if  in  danger  of 
'  death,  be  relieved  by  the  laver  of  regeneration  ?' 

"n  De  Baptismo,  Disput.  iv.  Thes.  iv. 

I'  Epist.  75.   [Ep.  250.  sect.  2.  in  edit.  Benedict.] 


230  Prcedestinarians  and  iSemipelagians. 

CHAF.vi.  Bishop  Stillingfleet  has  fully  shewn  °  the  ab- 
Year  after  surclltj  aiicl  incoiisistency  of  this  opinion  of  such 
stk  ^^'^  presbyterians ;  and  how  they  can  never  in  many 
cases  that  may  be  put,  come  to  a  resolution  or 
agreement  what  children  may  be  baptized,  and  what 
not:  and  has  cleared  the  grounds  of  baptism  from 
such  scruples.  And  as  for  the  text,  1  Cor.  vii.  14, 
on  which  they  build  those  scruples,  I  have  shewn  p 
that  the  ancients  do  understand  it  in  a  sense  much 
more  plain  and  natural,  and  more  agreeable  to  the 
scope  of  St.  Paul's  arguing  there,  which  gives  no 
foundation  for  any  such  scruple.  And  we  see  by 
the  instances  here  brought,  and  many  other,  that 
they  willingly  baptized  any  infants,  if  the  parents, 
or  any  other  that  were  owners  or  possessors  of  such 
infants,  shewed  so  much  faith  in  Christ  as  to  desire 
baptism  for  them. 


CHAP.  VII. 

An  account  of  the  state  of  this  practice  front  the  year  400 
till  the  rise  of  the  German  antipcedohaptists.  Of  the 
Waldenses,  and  their  chief  accusers,  St.  Bernard,  Petrus 
Cluniacensis,  Meinerius,  Pilichdorf  Sfc.  The  Confessions 
of  the  Waldenses  themselves. 

I.  I  GAVE  before  'i  a  note  of  reference  to  the 
books  of  some  authors  that  lived  after  the  year  400, 
for  the  use  of  those  that  would  trace  this  practice 
for  one  century  further.  The  general  account  of 
them  is,  that  they  speak  of  infant-baptism  as  a  thing 
uncontroverted.  And  so  it  holds  for  all  the  folloM^- 
ing  times  till  after  the  year   1000.     The  antip^do- 

o  Unreasonableness  of  Separation,  part  iii.  sect.  36. 

P  Part  i.  cli.   19.  §.  19.  item,  ch.  i  1.  §.  11.         q  Part  i.  ch.  22. 


No  Quotations  from  400  to  1000,  ^c.  231 

baptists  who  do  put  in  their  plea  for  the  first  300  ^  ^^  ^• 

or  400  years,  yet  do   (so  many  of  them  I  mean  as 

have  any  tolerable  degree  of  learning  and  ingenuity)  the  apo- 
confess,  that  in  all  these  following  ages  the  bap-^^^'^** 
tizing  of  infants  did  prevail.  Mr.  Tombes  says  ^ 
'  The  authority  of  Augustine  was  it  which  carried 
'  the  baptism  of  infants  in  the  following  ages,  almost 
'  without  control.'  And  though  it  appear  plainly 
by  St.  Austin's  writings,  which  I  have  largely 
produced,  that  there  was  no  Christian  in  the  world 
that  he  knew  or  heard  of,  that  denied  it,  (except 
those  that  denied  all  baptism,)  so  that  he  need  not 
say,  '  St.  Augustine's  authority  carried  it  :'  yet  it  is 
however  a  confession  of  the  matter  of  fact  for  the 
after-times. 

Only  whereas  he  puts  in  the  word  '  almost ;'  as 
if  some,  though  few,  did  oppose  it :  there  is,  on  the 
contrary,  not  one  saying,  quotation,  or  example, 
that  makes  against  it,  produced  or  pretended,  but 
what  has  been  clearly  shewn  to  be  a  mistake.  As 
in  the  first  400  years  there  is  none  but  one,  Tertul- 
lian,  who  advised  it  to  be  deferred  till   the  asre  of 

o 

reason ;  and  one,  Nazianzen,  till  three  years  of  age, 
in  case  of  no  danger  of  death  :  so  in  the  following 
600  there  is  no  account  or  report  of  any  one  man 
that  opposed  it  at  all. 

Some  places  of  authors  have  been  cited  indeed  : 
but  there  wants  nothing  but  looking  into  the  books 
themselves  to  see  that  they  are  nothing  to  the  pur- 
pose. So  Mr.  Danvers  created  to  Mr.  Wills  and 
Mr.  Baxter  a  great  deal  of  trouble,  in  sending  them 
from  one  book  to  another  to  discover  his  mistakes 
and    misrepresentations    of   several    authors    within 

r  Examen.  part  i.  §.  8.  p,  12. 


SS2  No  Quotations  from  400  to  1000 

^^^^^-  this  space:  but  withal  a  great   deal   of  discredit  to 
himself;  for  there  is  not  one  of  his  quotations,  that 


the  apo-  seemed  material  enough  to  need  searching,  but 
^^^^-  proved  to  be  such.  Mr.  Wills  had  at  first  yielded 
him  two  authors  as  being  on  his  side :  but  Mr. 
Baxter  coming  after,  (and  Mr.  Wills  himself  upon 
a  second  review,)  rectified  that  erroneous  conces- 
sion ;  as  was  easy  to  do  by  consulting  the  original 
authors ;  for  it  was  taking  the  scraps  and  breviates 
of  things  out  of  the  Magdeburgensian  epitomizers, 
which  occasioned  that  there  was  any  possibility  of 
mistake. 
^^°'  One  of  the  two  I  spoke  of  was  Hincmarus,  bishop 
of  Laudun,  whom  I  had  occasion  to  mention  in  the 
last  chapter  ^  on  another  account.  He  had  upon  a 
quarrel  ^  excommunicated  all  the  clergy  of  his  dio- 
cese, so  that  there  was  for  a  time  none  to  baptize, 
bury,  absolve,  &c.  Some  children  died  by  that 
means  without  baptism  :  complaint  was  made  to  his 
metropolitan  :  he  reproves  him,  shews  him  the  per- 
nicious consequences,  hopes  that  the  children  that 
died,  and  others  that  died  without  absolution,  the 
communion,  &c.,  may  by  God's  mercy  be  saved  ; 
(I  quoted  his  Mords  for  that  before,)  but  adds,  '  But 
'  as  for  you,  you  cannot  be  secure,  if  any  by  your 
'  order  have  died  without  the  said  sacraments,  that 
'  you  shall  not  be  severely  judged,  (though  the 
*  mercy  of  Almighty  God  make  it  up  in  them,) 
'  unless  your  true  humility  do  procure  your  par- 
'  don,'  &c.  The  stubborn  bishop  would  not  obey  ; 
but  recriminated  :  he  sent  word  to  the  archbishop  ", 

"    [^-ee  above,  p.  2  i  i .] 

t  Hincmar-i    Rhemeni^is   Opuscul.   55.    capituni,    cap.    28,    &c. 
ad  48.  "  Ibid.  Priefatio. 


can  be  controverted.  233 

saying,  *  You  gave  me  an  example  :  I  have  a  village  chap 

'  in  your   diocese,'  &c.   '  and   you  excommunicated L 

'  them  :  and  I  have  an  account  of  how  many  infants  ^jf^^p^'^' 

'  died  without  baptism,  and  men  without  the  com-^''es. 

770. 

'  munion,'  &c.  The  archbishop  denied  this ;  the 
matter  is  brought  before  the  synod  held  in  Attinia- 
cum^.      They  condemn  the  bishop  of  Lauduii. 

Now  see  what  Mr.  Danvers  makes  of  this,  (which 
I  set  down  as  a  specimen :  not  that  I  mean  to 
trouble  the  reader  with  tracing  him  any  further, 
whatever  I  have  done  myself,)  he  relates  it  thus^: 

'  Hincmarus,  bishop  of  Laudun  in  France  in  the 
'  ninth  century,  renounced  children's  baptism,  and 
'  refused  any  more  to  baptize  any  of  them,  so  that 
'  they  grew   up   without    baptism,   yea,   many   died 

'  without  it,'  &c. '  For  which  he  and  his  diocese 

'  was  accused  in  the  synod  of  Accinicus  in  France, 
'  in  these  words;  "  Ne  missas  celebrarent,  aut  in- 
'  fantes  baptizarent,  aut  poenitentes  absolverent,  aut 
'  mortuos  sepelirent ;" '  (which  he  translates,  con- 
trary to  the  idiom  of  Latin  phrase,  and  to  the 
tenour  of  the  history,  '  that  they  neither  celebrated 
'  mass,  baptized  children,  absolved  the  penitents,  or 
'  buried  the  dead.'  Whereas  the  accusation  was  not 
against  the  diocese,  but  against  the  bishop  only,  that 
he  had  excommunicated  them  and  interdicted  his 
clergy,  '  ne  missas  celebrarent,' &c.  '  that  they  should 

^  [Attiniacuin,  now  Attigny,  is  a  small  town  of  France,  in 
the  province  of  Champagne,  seated  on  the  river  Aisne.  At 
present  it  is  the  head  of  a  canton.  It  is  a  place  of  considerable 
antiquity,  and  memorable  as  the  seat  of  several  important  synods 
and  councils,  and  the  residence  of  several  of  the  early  kings  of 
France.] 

>'  Treatise,  part  ii.  cap.  7.  p.  233.  edit.  1674. 


234  Berengarius  is  accused  fahely . 

CHAP.  *  not   [or  could  not]  say  mass,  baptize  children,  ab- 

'. —  '  solve  penitents,  or  bury  the  dead.'     And  he  quotes 

thrapt'''  for  tl"s,   '  Bibl.  Patru7n,  torn.  ix.   part  ii.  p.   137; 
sties.         .  Magd.  Cent.  ix.  c.  4.  p.  40,  41,  43  ;  Dutch  Mar- 
*  tyrology,  p.  244,  part  i.' 

Now  for  Dutch  Martyrology  I  will  by  no  means 
answer.  But  this  I  will  undertake,  that  whoever 
looks  into  Hinanarus'  Optiscidiim,  which  is  recited 
in  Bihl.  Patrum,  torn.  ix.  part.  ii.  p.  93,  &c.  [p.  137 
seems  to  be  a  mistake  of  the  printer,]  ed.  Colon. 
1618  ;  or  into  Magd.  Cent.  ix.  c.  9-  p.  443,  [which 
is  the  place  that  must  be  meant,  though  his  print 
be  c.  4.  p.  40,  41,  43,]  edit.  Basil.  1547,  [p.  443. 
tit.  Sy7iodus  apud  Accmiaciim,  edit.  Basil.  1565.] 
will  find  the  account  of  the  matter  as  I  have  told 
it,  and  no  other. 

Now  at  such  a  rate  of  quoting,  reciting,  translat- 
ing, and  altering,  he  may  find  antipsedobaptists  in 
every  age,  and  at  any  place.  It  is  abundance  of  the 
quotations  that  he  has  brought,  which  I  as  well  as 
Mr.  Baxter  and  Mr.  Wills  have  searched,  and  never 
found  any,  not  so  much  as  one,  (of  those  I  mean 
which  are  for  the  centuries  aforesaid  from  400  to 
1000,  and  seemed  to  be  any  thing  material,)  but 
what  had  some  such  mistake  as  this,  or  a  worse,  in 
the  applying  of  them.  But  I  shall  not  go  on  to 
recite  them,  especially  since  the  foresaid  writers  have 
done  it  already^.  One  would  wonder  what  he  meant 
to  make  of  this  Hincmarus  :  if  Ave  can  conceive  that 
he  thought  his  opinion  to  be  against  baptizing  chil- 
dren, did  he  think  that  he  judged  burying  the  dead 
unlawful  too  ? 

z   Baxter,  More  Proofs,  &c.      Wills,  Infant-baptism  asserted; 
item,  Infant-baptism  reasserted. 


Berengarius  is  accused  falsely.  235 

II.  But  about  the  year  of  Christ  1050,  there  are  chap. 
quotations  that  have  better  foundation,  and  a  greater  ' 

appearance  of  truth,  and  do  at  least  deserve  an  ex- ^i^^''^  fy^**"'' 
amination  ;  concerning    Bruno,    bishop    of  Angers,  ^'^''^'*- 
and  Berengarius,  archdeacon  of  the  same  church  ; 
and  about  a  hundred  years  after,  some  concerning 
the  Waldenses  of  yet  greater  credit. 

Bruno  and  Berengarius  seemed  to  have  aimed  at  a 
reformation  of  some  corrujit  doctrines  then  in  the 
church  of  Rome.  They  had  an  opportunity  more 
advantageous  than  ordinary,  one  being  bishop,  and 
the  other  archdeacon  of  the  same  place.  They  are 
said  to  have  begun  their  attempt  about  1035,  when  935- 
Berengarius  was  but  a  young  man,  for  he  lived  fifty 
years  after  that  time.  They  opposed  transubstan- 
tiation,  for  which  they  had  a  great  many  mouths 
open,  and  many  pieces  wrote  against  them.  Among 
which  many,  there  is  one  (not  written  by  one  of  the 
same  nation,  but  a  foreigner,  who  owns  that  he 
speaks  by  hearsay)  that  charges  them  with  some 
error  that  did  overthrow  infant-baptism.  It  is  a 
letter  written  by  (Durandus.  bishop  of  Liege,  as95o- 
Baronius  and  the  editors  of  the  Bihl.  Patrmn  had 
supposed  ;  but  as  bishop  Ussher^  and  F.  Mabillon  ^ 
have  fully  proved,  by)  Deodwinus,  bishop  of  Liege, 
to  Henry  I.  king  of  France.     The  words  are  '^ : 

'  There  is  a  report  come  out  of  France,  and 
'  which  goes  through  all  Germany,  that  these  two 

a  De  Success.  Eccl.  p.  196.  [cap.  7.  sect.  24.  p.  99.  edit.  fol. 
.687.] 

^  Analect.  torn.  iv.  p.  396-  [Edit.  8vo.  Lut.  Paris.  1685  : 
p.  446.  edit.  fol.  Par.  1723.] 

I'  Bibl.  Patr.  torn.  xi.  edit.  Colon.  1618.  Durandi  Epist. 
[P-  43  2.1 


286  Berengarius  is  accused  falsely . 

CHAP,  'do  maintain  that  the  Lord's  body  [the  host]  is  not 

*  the  body,  but  a  shadow  and  figure  of  the  Lord's 

Year  after  4  body.     And    that    they   do   disannul    lawful   mar- 
sties.  «  riaoces :  and  as  far  as  in  them  lies,  overthrow  the 
*  baptism  of  infants.' 

Of  Bruno  we  hear  no  more  :  probably  he  died. 
But  of  Berengarius,  the  report  that  Deed  win  us 
had  heard  was  so  far  certainly  true,  as  that  he  did 
deny  the  real  presence  in  the  sacrament,  in  that 
proper  and  corporal  meaning,  in  which  a  great 
many  then  began  to  understand  it.  And  there  are 
a  little  after  this  a  great  many  tracts  written,  and  a 
955.  great  many  councils ''  held  against  him  and  others 
963.  of  his  opinion,  for  that  supposed  error.  But  none 
of  those  tracts,  nor  any  of  those  councils,  do  object 
any  error  held  by  him  in  reference  to  matrimony  or 
infant-baptism.  And  since  he  is  found  three  or 
four  several  times  to  have  been  received  to  commu- 
nion by  his  adversaries  upon  his  recantation  of  that 
his  opinion  of  the  eucharist,  without  mention  of  any 
other ;  it  is  probable,  and  almost  certain,  that  the 
report  which  Deodwinus  had  heard  of  his  holding 
those  other  opinions  was  a  mistake  :  or  else  that 
(as  bishop  Ussher  ^  guesses)  he  had  denied  that  bap- 
tism does  confer  grace  ea-  opere  operato :  which 
was  enough  at  that  time  to  make  his  adversaries 
say,  he  did  overthrow  baptism.  And  that  is  Deod- 
wins'  word :  he  does  not  say,  they  denied  it ;  but 
his  words  are,  '  Quantum  in  ipsis  est,  parvulorum 

d  Concil.  Turonense.  Anno  1055.  [edit.  Mansi,  torn.  xix. 
p.  839. J  Romanum  1063.  [or  1059.  See  Concilia,  edit.  Mansi, 
torn.  xix.  p.  897.] 

e  De  Success.  Eccles.  cap.  7.  sect.  37.  p.  105.  edit.  fol.  Lond. 
1687.] 


Berenparius  is  accused  falsely.  237 

'  baptismum   evertunt.'     'They,  as  far  as    in   them  chap. 
*  lies,  overthrow  the  baptism  of  infants.'  L_ 


Year  after 


Guitmund  indeed,  who  is  one  of  those  many  that  ^j^*''''' 
I  said  wrote  as^ainst  Berenofarius  toward  the  latter ***'«*• 

.  .  975- 

end  of  his  life  about  his  opinion  of  the  other  sacra- 
ment, does  take  notice  of  Deodwin's  letter,  and  of 
the  report  therein  mentioned  of  his  holding  those 
other  opinions  :  but  he  speaks  of  them  as  of  tenets 
which  Berengarius,  if  he  ever  held  them,  never  did 
think  fit  to  own  or  publish  :  for  his  wordsf  are, 
that  '  Berengarius   finding  that  those  two  opinions 

*  [of  marriage  and  baptism]  would  not  be  endured 
'  by  the  ears  even  of  the  worst  men  that  were  :  and 
'  that  there  was  no  pretence  in  Scripture  to  be 
'  brought  for  them  :   betook  himself  wholly  to  up- 

*  hold   the   other,   [viz.  that   against  transubstantia- 

*  tion,]  in  which  he  seemed  to  have  the  testimony 
'  of  our  senses  on  his  side,  and  against  which  none 
'  of  the  holy  Fathers  had  so  fully  spoken,  and  for 

*  which  he  picked  up  some  reasons  and  some  places 

*  of  Scripture  misunderstood,'  &c. 

This  is   what  he   says  as  by  report   from   Deod-97o- 
win's  letter.     And  for  his  other  adversaries^.  Lan-9So- 
franc,    Adelman^',    Algerus',    and    others,    they    do '°3o- 
not  at  all,  as  I  can  find,  mention  any  thing  about 
baptism. 

One  thing  I  do  here  note  by  the  by :  that  both 

'  De  Veritate  Corporis  et  Sanguinis  Christi,  lib.  i.  [apud 
Biblioth.  Patrum,  torn,  xi.p.350,  &c.  edit.  Colon.  1618.] 

S  De  Eucharistiae  Sacramento.  [Apud  Bibl.  Patr.  torn.  xi. 
P- 337-1 

^  Epistola  ad  Berengarium  de  Veritate,  &c.  [P.ibl.  Patr.  xi. 
p.  348,&c.] 

'  De  Sacramento  Corporis  et  Sanguinis  [Dominici,  apud  Bibl. 
Patr.  xii.  410.] 


238  Berengarians.    Waldenses. 

CHAP,   this  Guitmund,   and    the    others    mentioned,  do  so 
1_  maintain  the  doctrine  of  transubstantiation  against 


^ra  o^*^'  Berengarius,  as  that  they  say  nothing  of  worship- 
sties,  ping  the  host,  nor  any  thing  from  whence  one  may 
gather  that  it  was  then  practised  in  the  church  of 
Rome  itself.  I  believe  they  then  held  transubstan- 
tiation, as  the  Lutherans  do  now  consubstantiation, 
so  as  not  to  worship  the  host  as  the  papists  do 
now. 

Now  for  the  next  age  after  this  ;  the  author  of 
the  acts  of  Bruno  archbishop  of  Triers  cited  by 
bishop  Ussher''  says,  that  the  said  Bruno  taking  on 
him  to  expel  those  that  were  of  the  Berengarian 
sect  out  of  his  diocese,  there  were  some  found  among 
them,  who  upon  examination  confessed  their  opinion 
to  be,  that  '  baptism  does  no  good  to  infants  for 
'  their  salvation.'  And  the  said  author  tells  it  upon 
his  credit,  that  he  was  present  at  their  confession, 
and  heard  them  say  so. 

III.  But  it  is  probable  that  these  were  a  sort  of 
people  that  have  been  since  called  Waldenses.  For 
1050  it  must  be  observed,  that  in  this  age,  viz.  the  twelfth 
century,  several  societies  of  men  began  to  make  a 
figure  in  the  world,  who  differing  from  one  another 
in  some  other  matters,  all  ao^reed  in  renouncino-  the 
])ope  and  see  of  Rome,  and  denying  transubstan- 
tiation, and  the  worship  of  images,  and  some  other 
grosser  corruptions  lately  brought  into  that  church. 
These  were  at  first  in  several  places  called  by  seve- 
ral names  and  nicknames,  but  have  been  since  by 
our  English  writers  denoted  by  the  general  name  of 
Waldenses.     And  one  of  the  nicknames  in  use  at 

•^  De  Success.  Eccles.  c.  7.  p.  207.  [p.  105.  edit.  1687.] 


Berengariang.      Waldenses.  239 

this    time,  was   to   call    them    Berengarians.     Now   chap. 
whether  those  in  Bruno's  diocese,  that  were  so  call-      ^ "' 
ed,  did  mean  by  that  sayin^r  of  theirs,  that  baptism  ^'^''*'' ^^'^^ 
itself  IS  a  thing  of  no  use,  to  infants    or    any  one  sties. 
.else ;    or  whether   they   put    the   emphasis    on    the 
word    infants,    does    not    appear:    and    there    were 
about  this  time  some  sects  that  would  say  the  one, 
and  some  that  would  be  apt  to  say  the  other ;  as  I 
shall  shew. 

Beside  the  name  of  Berengarians,  other  names 
that  were  severally  used  at  several  places  and  times, 
were  these  ;  Cathari  [or  Puritans],  Paterines,  Pe- 
trobrusians,  Lyonists,  Albigenses,  Waldenses,  and 
several  more.  And  these,  though  differing  many  of 
them  very  much  from  one  another,  have  been  of 
late  confusedly  and  by  one  general  name  called 
Waldenses.  But  the  more  exact  accounts,  and  par- 
ticularly INIr.  Limborch's*  history  of  the  inquisition, 
do  distinguish  the  Waldenses  from  the  Albigenses, 
both  as  to  their  tenets  and  their  places  of  abode. 
And  it  is,  I  think,  only  among  the  latter,  that  any 
antipsedobaptists  were  found.  As  France  was  the 
first  country  in  Christendom  where  dipping  of  chil- 
dren in  baptism  was  left  off;  so  there  first  antip«- 
dobaptism  began. 

But  of  these  AValdenses  so  taken  in  a  lump,  the 
paedobaptist  and  antipaedobaptist  writers  do  at  this 
time  hotly  dispute  whether  they  held  for  or  against 
infant-baptism. 

The  antipaedobaptists  produce  the  evidence  of 
the  popish  writers  of  that  time,  who  wrote  against 

'  [Philippi  a  Limborch  Historia  Inquisitionis,  fol.  Amst.  1692. 
lib.  i.  cap.  8.  p.  30.  In  English,  by  Sam.  Chandler,  2  vols.  4to, 
1731.  The  same  work  abridged,  i  vol.  8vo.  London,  1816.] 


240  The  Confessions  of  the  H'aldenses. 

CHAP,   them:   some  of  which  do  plainly  and  fully  charge 
some  of  them  with  denying  it. 


tlrapo'?'"^       The  protestant  paedobaptists  say,  this  was  one  slan- 
sties.  (jgj.  Qf  many  with  which  those  their  adversaries  en- 

deavoured to  blacken  them,  because  they  condemned- 
the  errors  and  corruptions  of  the  church  of  Rome : 
and  produce  for  evidence  several  confessions  of  the 
Waldenses  themselves,  wherein  they  own  infant- 
baptism.  Now  such  confessions  were  doubtless  more 
to  be  relied  on  than  the  accusations  of  their  adver- 
saries, if  they  were  as  ancient  as  they. 

The  present  Waldenses,  or  Vaudois  in  Piedmont, 
who  are  the  posterity  of  those  old,  do  practise  infant- 
baptism  :  and  they  were  also  found  in  the  practice 
of  it,  when  the  protestants  of  Luther's  reformation 
sent  to  know  their  state  and  doctrine,  and  to 
1430. confer  with  them:  and  they  themselves  do  say,  that 
their  fathers  never  practised  otherwise.  And  they 
give  proof  of  it  from  an  old  book  of  theirs,  called 
the  Spiritual  Almanack"',  where  infant-baptism  is 
owned :  and  Perrin,  their  historian,  gives  the  reason 

""'  Perrin,  Hist,  of  Waldenses,  lib.  i.  c.  4.  [See  Histoire  des 
Vaudois,  par  J.  P.  Pei-rin.  i2mo.  A  Geneve,  1619.  Also  Lu- 
ther's Fore-runners,  or  a  cloud  of  witnesses  deposing  for  the 
IVotestant  faith,  gathered  together  in  the  history  of  the  Wal- 
denses, &c.  collected  by  J.  P.  P.  L.  [Jean  Paul  Perrin,  Lionois] 
translated  out  of  French,  by  Samson  Lennard,  4to.  London, 
1624. — Lennard  also  translated  and  published  at  the  same 
time,  Perrin's  '  Histoire  des  Christiens  Albigeois ;'  which  had 
appeared  by  itself  at  Geneva,  i2mo.  1618,  but  in  fact  is  only 
the  second  part  of  the  joint  work,  embracing  a  history  of  both 
these  people,  together  with  such  points  of  discipline  and  doc- 
trine, as  were  common  to  the  two.  !Some  confusion  arises  from 
the  mode  of  publication  :  parts  two  and  three  having  appeared 
together,  in  1618,  paged  consecutively,  i  — 156:  157 — 333,  and 
part  I,  dated  1619,  ])aged  i — 248.] 


The  Confessions  of  the  Waldemes.  241 

of  the  report  that  had  been  to  the  contrary,  viz.  chap. 
that  their  ancestors  'being  constrained  for 'some -I^ 
Mmndred  years  to  suffer  their  children  to   be  bap-.^hraf"" 

*  tized  by  the  priests   of  the  church  of  Rome,  they^^'^^-^"" 
'  deferred  the  doing  thereof  as  long  as  they  could, 

*  because  tliey  had  in  detestation  those  human  inven- 
'  tions  that  were  added  to  the  sacrament,  which  they 
^*  held  to  be  the  pollution  thereof.  And  forasmuch 
'  as  their  own  pastors  were  many  times  abroad, 
'  employed  in  the  service  of  their  churches,  they 
'  could  not  have  baptism   administered   to   their  in- 

*  fants  by  their  own  ministers.  For  this  cause  they 
'  kept  them  long  from  baptism :  which  the  priests 
'perceiving,   and   taking    notice    of,    charged    them 

*  with  this  slander.'  lliere  are  many  other  confes- 
sions of  theirs  of  like  import,  produced  bv  Perrin 
Baxter,  Wills,  &c.  This  is  the  account  the  Wal~ 
denses  give  of  themselves  in  those  confessions,  some 
of  which  seem  to  have  been  published  about  two 
hundred  years  ago.  One,  of  the  Bohemian  Wal- 
denses,  is  dated  1508  ". 

But  the  antipaedobajitists  (some  of  them)  say,  this 
was  by  a  corrupt   compliance:  for  that  Sabout  this 

*  tmie  they  made  a  great  defection  from  their  for- 
'  mev  principles  and  integrities,  and  have  too  much 
^*  gendered  since  into  the  formalities  of  the   Hugo- 

*  nots.'  As  if  they  had  done  it  in  compliance  with 
Luther,  who  did  not  begin  till  1517. 

Yet  they  can  produce  no  other  or  elder  confession 
of  theirs,  that  speaks  contrar^^  to  these.  There  are 
extant  several   of  their  elder  confessions,  which  ex- 

"  [Another,  presented  by  them  to  the  king  of  Bohemia  in 
^heyear  1533,  is  given  at  length  in  Leger's  Histoire,  &c.  part  L 
p.  96.] 

WALL,   VOL.   II.  J, 


1408. 


I417. 


242  The  Confessions  of  the  Waldenses. 

CHAP,  press  particularly  the  points  in  which  they  protested 
'      against  what  they  held  to  be  corrupt  in  the  Romish 


Year  after  doctriue    and    way,    as    ae-ainst    transubstantiation, 

the  apo-  J '  o 

sties.  chrism,  extreme  unction,  &c.,  but  do  mention  no- 

thing, one  way  or  other,  about  infant-baptism  : 
which  is  a  sign  that  that  was  none  of  the  things 
they  disowned.  They  do  in  several  of  their  old 
books,  copied  in  Perrin's  history  of  them,  speak  of 
baptism  and  the  other  sacrament  (for  they  owned 
but  two).  And  in  them  they  oppose  themselves 
against  the  popish  doctrine  of  the  sacraments  :  and 
particularly  they  blame  the  papists  for  relying  too 
much  on  the  outward  or  visible  part  of  them  (as 
the  protestants  do  now  to  the  same  purpose  blame 
that  tenet  of  theirs  ;  that  '  sacraments  do  confer 
'  grace  ecV  opere  operato,  by  the  outward  work 
'  done').  And  there  is  one  of  them  also  that  does 
mention  the  baptizing  of  children,  but  so  as  to 
leave  the  main  question  still  ambiguous.  It  is  their 
Treatise  concerning  Antichrist :  written,  as  is  pre- 
I020. tended,  anno  1120.°  But  I  do  not  believe  that; 
not  having  found  any  other  account  of  this  people 
so  early.  In  it  they  say  (as  Perrin  recites  it  at  the 
end  of  his  history  p  :)  '  He  [Antichrist]  attributes  the 

*  reformation  of  the  Holy  Spirit  to  a  dead,  outward 
'  faith,   and  baptizes  children   into  that   faith,  that 

*  thereby  baptism  and  regeneration  must  be  had, 
'  and  gives  and  receives  orders,  and  other  sacra- 
'  ments   by  that,   grounding    therein   all  his   Chris- 

o  [See  '  Histoire  generale  des  Eglises  evangeliques  des  Val- 
lees  de  Piemont,  ou  Vaudoises :  par  Jean  Leger,'  folio,  a  Leyde, 
1669.     Livr.  i.  ch.  4.  p.  26.] 

P  [Page  267.  French  edition,  1618.  p.  75,  English  edit. 
1624.] 


The  Waldenses.  243 

'  tianitv,   which   is    ao^ainst  the   Holy  Spirit.'     One  chap. 

*  *  .    .  VII 

party  say,  they  do  hereby  condemn  all  baptizing  of 


children,  as  a  dead,  outward  work.     The  other  say,  \^®'''" '*^'*^'" 

'  '  •'    the  apo- 

they  ought  by  these  words  to  be  understood  to  own  sties. 
bai)tizing  of  children ;  and  to  except  only  against 
the  foresaid  popish  tenet :  for,  whether  it  be  in  chil- 
dren or  grown  persons,  it  is  an  antichristian  or 
popish  abuse  to  ascribe  the  regeneration  to  the  dead 
outward  work,  or  mere  outward  act ;  which  ought 
especially  to  be  ascribed  to  the  grace  or  mercy  of 
God,  sealing  and  confirming  the  covenant  to  them. 
Perrin  himself,  who  produces  it,  understands  it  so. 
And  there  is  a  Catechism  of  theirs,  which  Perrin 
says'!,  is  composed  out  of  their  old  books,  that  does 
expressly  mention  and  own  infant-baptism.  But  of 
what  date  that  Catechism  is,  I  know  not. 

Bishop  Ussher  ^  quotes  out  of  Hoveden's  Annals  1070- 
in  Henry  II.  fol.  319.  edit.  London,  a  confession  of 
faith  made  by  the  Boni  Jiomines  of  Tholouse,  (this 
was  one  name  given  to  one  of  those  sorts  of  men  that 
have  been  since  called  Waldenses,)  who  being  sum- 
moned and  examined  before  a  meeting  of  bishops, 
abbots,  &c.,  repeated  it  before  the  assembly ;  but 
being  urged  to  swear  to  it,  refused.  In  the  body  of 
which  confession  they  say ;  *  Credimus  etiam  quod 
'  non  salvatur  quis,  nisi  qui  baptizantur :  et  parvulos 
'  salvari  per  baptisma.'  '  We  believe  also  that  no 
'  person  is  saved,  but  what  is  baptized :  and  that  in- 
*  fants   are   saved  by  baptism.'     Mr.  Baxter  having 


1    Part   iii.  lib.  i.  ch.  6.    [p.  213.  French    edit.  1618;    p.  43. 
English  edit.  1624.] 

"■  De   Success.    Eccles.  cap.  viii.  p.  242.    [§.  34.  p.  122.  edit. 

1687.] 

R  2 


244  The  Waldenses. 

CHAP,    been  called  upon  by  Danvers  to  produce  any  confes- 
"      sion  of  theirs  of  any  ancient  date  that  owned  infant- 
^h'^^a/'^'^"   baptism,  produces  this^  which  was   about  the  year 
sties.  1176,  and   says,  'Would  you  have   a  fuller  proof?* 

But  the  other  answers  *,  that  this  confession  was  not 
what  they  naturally  and  usually  held:  but  what  the 
court  forced  them  to  say  by  way  of  recantation  : 
which  proves  rather,  that  they  usually  held  the 
contrary,  or  were  suspected  so  to  do.  This  latter 
appears  by  the  story  to  be  the  truth  of  the  matter : 
and  it  is  wonder  Mr.  Baxter  would  urge  it.  But 
however  it  signifies  nothing  to  the  purpose.  For 
these  men  were  Manichees,  (as  appears  by  the  other 
opinions  the  court  made  them  recant,  viz.  that 
there  were  '  two  Gods,  whereof  the  evil  God  made 
'  the  visible  world,'  &c.)  and  consequently  the  opin- 
ions they  held  against  baptism,  were  against  all 
baptism  of  old  or  young,  that  it  is  good  for  nothing  : 
and  so  when  they  denied  '  that  infants  are  saved  by 
*  baptism ;'  their  meaning  was,  that  no  person  is 
ever  the  more  saved  for  being  baptized.  This  they 
then  recanted.  And  this  is  a  known  tenet  of  the 
Manichees  "  :  of  whom  there  were  many  in  these 
parts,  whose  story  is  confounded  with  that  of  the 
other  Waldenses,  as  I  shall  shew  by  and  by. 

It  is  to  be  noted,  that  they  that  write  against 
them  do  accuse  them  of  abundance  of  heresies  and 
monstrous  doctrines :  and  that  with  great  variety  ^. 


s  More  Proofs,  p.  380.      *  Second  Reply,  [ch.  ii.  §.  5.  p.  84.] 

"  See  ch.  v.  §.  3. 

"  [_See  a  collection  of  these,  edited  by  the  .Tesiiit  Gretser,  4°. 
[ngolstadt,  1614,  and  reprinted  in  the  '  Bibliotheca  Patrum,' 
torn.  xiii.  p.  228 — 344.  edit.  Colon.  161 8.] 


The  Waklenses.  245 

One  writer  of  one  time  and  place  accuses  those  that  chap. 
he  writes  against  (whom  he  calls  by  such  or  such  a L_ 


name,  as  Puritans,  Apostolics,  &c.)  of  one  set  of  ^j^*^^^  ^^*^'' 
false  doctrines ;  and  another  writer,  of  another  time  s^^^s. 
and  country,  lays  to  the  charge  of  those  that  he 
writes  against,  whom  he  names  ])erhaps  by  some 
other  name,  as  Arnoldists,  &c.,  another  catalogue 
of  heterodox  opinions.  But  one  general  thing  that 
they  were  all  guilty  of,  is  their  renouncing  and 
defying  the  church  and  pope  of  Rome. 

And  for  the  other  opinions,  (such  I  mean  as  are 
really  false  ones,  and  not  only  by  the  papists  so 
accounted,)  they  run  for  the  most  part  on  the  vein 
of  the  old  IManichean  heresy;  and  they  do  often 
expressly  call  them  Manichees.  The  old  INIanichees 
held  two  principles,  or  gods ;  the  one  good  and 
the  other  evil ;  and  that  the  evil  god  made  the 
material  world  :  they  renounce  and  blaspheme  the 
Old  Testament,  and  part  of  the  New :  they  denied 
the  resurrection  of  the  body,  believing  that  a  man 
survives  after  death  only  by  his  soul  :  they  had  no 
use  of  baptism  nor  of  marriage  :  they  abhorred  the 
eating  of  any  flesh,  &c.  These  same  opinions, 
and  other  of  the  old  Manichees,  are  generally  the 
chief  ingredients  in  the  heresies  imputed  to  these 
men. 

There  is  also  great  variety  in  the  account  of 
their  morals.  Some  give  to  those  they  describe, 
the  character  of  sober,  just,  and  conscientious  men ; 
though  of  heretical  ojjinions.  Others  paint  those 
they  write  against  as  men  of  lewd  lives  as  well  as 
doctrines.  Most  of  the  books  against  them  are 
between  the  year  1140  and  the  year  1400.  What  1040. 
was  done  against  them  afterw-^rd  was  chiefly  by  fire 


246  The  Waldenses. 

CHAP,  and  swordy.     Several  armies  were,  by  the  instigation 

'. of  popes,  and  the  forwardness  of  princes,  sent  against 

^Tapt!^'^  them :  which  sometimes  dispersed  them  but  coukl 
sties.         never  extirpate  them. 

The  countries  that  were  fullest  of  them,  were  the 
south  parts  of  France,  for  the  Albigenses ;  and  the 
north  parts  of  Italy,  and  the  valleys  between  the 
Alps,  for  the  Waldenses.  Which  last  place  proved 
so  good  a  refuge  for  them,  that  they  have  continued 
and  do  continue  there  to  this  day:  save  that  the 


y   [The  reader,  who  is  desirous  of  obtaining  more  ample  in- 
formation on  these  matters,  is  referred  to  the  following  works : 

1.  Perrin's  Histoire  des  Vaudois,  1619. 

2.  Or,  its  translation  by  Lennard,  1624;  as  described  in  a 
former  note. 

3.  P.  Gilles,  Histoire  des  Eghses  Reformees  de  Piedmont,  40. 
Geneva,  1644. 

4.  S.  Morland's  History  of  the  evangelical  Churches  of  the 
Valleys  of  Piemont,  folio,  London,  1658. 

5.  Jean  Leger,  Histoire  des  Eglises  ^vang^liques  des  Valines 
de  Piemont,  foho,  a  Leyde,  1669. 

6.  The  History  of  the  Vaudois,  by  Peter  Boyer,  1  2".  London, 
1692. 

7.  Remarks  on  the  Ecclesiastical  History  of  the  Ancient 
Churches  of  Piedmont,  by  Peter  Allix,  4".  London,  1690; 
reprinted  at  Oxford,  8".  1821. 

8.  Remarks  on  the  Ecclesiastical  History  of  the  Ancient 
Churches  of  the  Albigenses,  by  the  same,  40.  London, 
1693  ;  reprinted  at  Oxford,  80.  1821. 

9.  Henri  Arnaud,  Histoire  de  la  glorieuse  Rentree  des  Vaudois 
dans  leurs  Vallees,  80.  1710. 

10.  A  translation  of  the  preceding  work,  with  a  compendious 
history  of  that  people,  by  H.  D.  Acland.  8".  London, 
1827. 

11.  An  Excursion  to  the  Mountains  of  Piemont,  and  researches 
among  the  Vaudois,  by  W.  S.  Gilly,  4°.  London,  1824  ; 
So.  corrected  and  enlarged  edition,  1825.] 


Many  sorts  of  the  Waldenses.  247 

French  king  has  lately  driven  out  those  that  lived  chap. 
within  his  limits,  and   forced  them  to  seek  habita-  " 

tions  in  Germany  and  elsewhere.    Yet  some  say  that  Y*''''"  ^^^^^ 

•J  •'  the  apo- 

the   inhabitants   of  the   Cevennes,  that  are  now  in  sties. 
arms,  are  also  the  offspring  of  this  people. 

It  must  be  noted  further,  as  to  the  matter  of 
baptism,  that  some  of  the  foresaid  writers  do  repre- 
sent those  against  whom  they  write,  as  denying  all 
baptism :  some  others  do  so  speak  of  them  whom 
they  oppose,  as  if  they  allowed  baptism  to  the  adult, 
but  not  to  infants :  and  others,  among  all  the  false 
doctrines  which  they  charge  on  those  they  write 
against,  mention  no  error  about  bajjtism  at  all. 

Now  see  the  i)ower  of  prejudice,  which  it  has  to 
make  each  party  construe  and  interpret  the  same 
relations  of  matter  of  fact  to  the  sense  that  their 
side  would  have  to  be  true.  The  papists  believe  that 
all  the  accusations  of  these  people  are  true  :  and 
that  they  were  such  in  all  points  as  those  old  monks 
and  inquisitors  have  painted  them.  The  protestant 
paedobaptists  think  that  they  really  held  those  tenets 
against  the  church  of  Rome ;  but  that  all  the  rest 
are  false  and  malicious  accusations  ;  among  which 
they  reckon  that  of  their  denying  infants'  baptism 
for  one.  And  this  is  what  the  present  Waldenses 
themselves  do  affirm.  The  antipa'dobai)tists  say, 
that  all  the  protestant  doctrines  are  truly  imputed 
to  them,  and  so  is  their  denial  of  infant-baptism, 
but  all  the  rest  are  false. 

IV.  I  shall  by  no  means  undertake  a  recital  of 
all  the  particular  quotations :  partly  because  they 
are  so  numerous,  confused,  and  contrary  to  one 
another  ;  but  especially  because  they  are  so  far 
below  the   date   of   those   times   which   I   have   set 


248  Many  sorts  of  the  Waldenses. 

CHAP,  myself  to  examine.     Whatever  the  tenets  of  these 

VI  J. 

. '—  men  were,  they  are  much   too  late  to  give  us  any 

Uirap^o^'  direction  about  the  sense  of  the  primitive  church. 
sties.  J  gi^r^ii  Qj^iy  ^ake  hold  of  a  handle  which  some  of 
each  of  our  opposite  parties  do  give  of  an  expedient 
to  reconcile  this  historical  difference.  Which  is  by 
slitting  the  matter  in  disi)ute,  and  supposing  that 
some  sects  of  these  people  did  deny  infant-baptism, 
and  others  not. 

For  as  Mr.  Baxter  says  at  one  place  >',  '  Now  I 
*  leave  it  to  the  reader,  among  many  uncertainties, 
'  which  of  these  he  will  believe  most  probable. 
'  1.  That  all  the  parties  were  slandered  :  2.  Or 
'  that  Peter  and  Henry  were  slandered,  by  occasion 
'  of  the  mixed  Manichees,  or  by  the  vulgar  lying 
'  levity,  or  popish  malice.  3.  Or  whether  Peter  and 
'  Henry  were  guilty,  as  some  now,  though  the  rest 

'  were  not.     4.  Or,'  &c. .     '  Believe  which  of 

'  these  you  find  most  cause.' 

So  likewise  on  the  other  side,  Mr.  Tombes  says^ : 
'  As  for  the  Albigenses  and  Waldenses,  it  might  be 
'  true  that  some  might  be  ag-ainst  infant-baptism, 
'  yet  others  not : — Or  it  may  be  that  they  all  at 
'  the  beginning  held  so ;  but  after  left  it.'  And 
Mr.  Dan  vers  ^:  'Neither  would  I  be  thought  to 
'  assert  such  an  universal  harmony  amongst  the 
'  Waldenses  in  this  thing,  but  that  it  is  possible 
'  there  might  be  some  difference  among  some  of 
'  them,  even  in  this  particular.' 

So   far  they  come   toward   a   compliance.     And 
there   is  nothing  in   so    obscure   a   matter,   and   so 

y  More  Proofs,  p.41 1. 

'   PrEecursor,  p.  30.  [4to.  London,  1652.] 

<i  Treatise,  part  ii.  ch.  7.  p.  321.  second  edition. 


Eckbert,  of  the  Cathari.  249 

perplexed  an  account,  more  probable  than  this.   And  chap. 
to  evince  it,  I  shall,  ' 


1.  Shew  that  there  were  many  several  sects  of^j^^^^^^^^*^^" 
those  men,  whom  we  now  call  by  one  general  name*'^''^^- 
Waldenses  : 

2.  Produce  what  proofs  there  are  that  some  of 
them  denied  infant-baptism ;  and  what  probability 
they  carry  : 

3.  Shew  how  it  appears  of  the  most  of  them, 
that  they  did  not  deny  it. 

First,  however  later  writers  have  agreed  for 
method's  sake  to  call  them  by  one  general  name  of 
Waldenses,  (because  that  is  the  name  that  those 
which  now  remain  call  themselves  by,)  yet  it  is 
plain  that  at  the  beginning  they  were  of  several 
sorts,  names,  and  opinions.  Bishop  Ussher,  in  his 
book  de  Successione  Ecclesice^  has  proved,  by  good 
historical  evidences,  that  there  were  some  real  Ma- 
nichees  that  crowded  in  amongst  them  :  whicli,  as 
he  supposes,  gave  occasion  to  the  papists  to  slander 
the  whole  body.  For  the  Manichees  did  really  con- 
temn all  baptism,  as  the  Quakers  do  now  :  and  held 
many  other  of  the  worst  opinions  which  are  now 
affixed  to  the  Quakers. 

Eckbertus  Schonaugiensis''  wrote,  anno  1160,  a  io6o. 
treatise  against  a  people  then  spread  in  many  coun- 
tries, '  whom,'  says  he,  '  our  Germans  call  Cathari, 
'  puritans ;  the  Flemish  call  them  PipJdes ;  the 
'French,  Ted/eranf :  (I  suppose  it  is  misprinted, 
'  he  interprets  it  weavers.'')  Their  tenets,  which  he 
repeats,  shew  tliem  to  be  Manichees  :  such  as,  the 

^  Serm.  i.  Bibl.  Putr.  torn.  xii.  edit.  Colon,  i6iS.   [p.  898.] 
<"  [This  seems  to  be  a  niispi'int  for  Tibsei-a/ids  ] 


250  EcJchert,  of  the  Cathari. 

CHAP,  unlawfulness  of  marriage;    of  eating  any  flesh,  as 

'      being  the  creature  of  the  Devil ;  that  Christ  had  no 

thra^o^-^'^  true    human    nature,  &c.      He    had    disputed   with 

sties.  several  of  them  :  and  he  says,  Serm.  1,  '  They  are 

'  also  divided  among  themselves ;  for  several  things 

*  that  are  maintained  by  some  of  them  are  denied 
'  by  others.'  And  of  baptism  particularly,  he  says  ; 
'  Of  baptism  they  speak  variously  :  that  baptism 
'  does  no  good  to  infants,  because  they  cannot  of 
'  themselves  desire  it,  and  because  they  cannot  pro- 
'  fess  any  faith.     But  there  is  another  thing  which 

*  they  more  generally  hold  concerning  that  point, 
'  though  more  secretly,  viz.  that  no  water-baptism 
'  at  all  does  any  good  for  salvation :  and  therefore 

*  such  as  come  over  to  their  sect  they  rebaptize  by 
'  a  private  way,  which  they  call  baptism  with  the 
'  Holy  Spirit  and  ivith  fire.^ 

And  in  Serm.  8,  which  is  a  chapter  on  purpose 
to  prove  to  them  the  use  of  water-baptism,  (as  the 
7th  is  to  prove  infant-baptism,)  he  tells  how  this 
baptism  with  fire  was :  and  he  says  he  had  heard  it 
from  one  that  had  been  at  their  secret  meetings. 
It  is  in  short  thus ;  in  a  close  room  they  light  can- 
dles or  torches,  as  many  as  can  be  placed,  round  by 
the  walls  and  every  where.  The  company  stand  in 
order  with  great  reverence :  the  person  that  is  to 
be  baptized  {sive  catharizandus,  or  puritanized)  is 
placed  in  the  midst :  the  Archicatharus  standing  by 
him,  with  a  book  used  to  this  purpose,  lays  the  book 
on  his  head,  and  pronounces  certain  benedictions, 
the  rest  praying  the  while.  This  is  called  baptism 
with  fire,  because  of  the  lights  around,  which  make 
the  room  look  ahiiost  as  if  it  were  on  fire.  But  he 
tells    them ;    '  This    is  not   the   way,  you    heretics ; 


Eckhert,  and  Pilichdorf.  251 

*  nor  to  the  purpose  that  you  pretend.     You  ought  chap. 

*  to  make  a  good  roasting  fire,  and  put  him  in,'  &c.  ' 


What  he  says  of  their  slighting  all  water-bap- ^^^^^  j^^^*"" 
tisra,  but  especially  infant-baptism,  does  help  to^^'<^^- 
make  one  understand  many  passages  that  we  meet 
with  in  the  writings  against  these  men.  The  say- 
ings of  many  sorts  of  them,  that  are  quoted  as 
speaking  against  infant-baptism,  ought  not  to  be  so 
taken  as  that  they  approved  baptism  of  the  adult, 
and  denied  it  to  infants  :  but  they  really  looked  on 
all  water-baptism  as  a  superstitious  thing ;  only 
they  thought  it  yet  more  absurd  in  the  case  of 
infants.  They  laughed  at  the  Christians  for  two 
things  :  one,  that  they  placed  religion  in  washing 
people  at  all;  and  the  other,  that  they  did  it  to 
infants.  When  their  arguments  failed  against  bap- 
tism in  general,  they  took  the  advantage  of  the 
incapacity  of  infants.  And  so  do  now  the  Quakers, 
some  of  the  Socinians,  the  Deists,  and  such  other 
sects  as  would  have  men  go  by  reason  rather  than 
by  Scripture ;  they  undervalue  this  sacrament  in 
general,  but  they  particularly  deride  the  applying 
of  it  to  infants. 

Pilichdorf  also,  writing  against  these  men^,  gives  1295. 
an  account  of  the  difference  of  their  several  sects  : 
he  says,  [ch.  12.]  'the  Waldenses  do  dislike,  and 
'  even  loath  the  Runcarians,  Beghards,  and  Luci- 
'  ferians.''  And  that  '  whereas  all  catholics  from 
'  the  four  quarters  of  the  world  agree  in  the  unity 
*  of  the  faith,  the  heretics  do  not  so,  but  some  of 
'  them  condemn  the  rest,'  &c. 

But  above  all  the  rest,  this  is  clearly  made  out  1 154. 

d  Contra    sectam    Waldensium,  c.  12.    [apud    Bibl.    Patrum, 
torn.  xiii.  p.  3  i  2,  &c. 


252  Eckhert  and  Reinerius, 

CHAP,  by  Reinerius.     He  knew  all  the  sorts,  differences, 

^^^'      and  circumstances  of  those  people  that  have  been 

Year  after  gjnce  stvlcd  AValdcuses,  better  than  any  man.     He 

the  apo-  •' 

sties.  had  lived  among  them,  and  had  been  one  of  one 
sort  of  them  for  seventeen  years,  and  then  after  his 
renouncing  of  them  was  made  an  inquisitor  against 
them.  It  is  pity  that  he  had  neither  a  style  to 
write  clearly,  nor  the  candour  to  express  their  tenets 
fairly  :  he  in  representing  their  opinions  frequently 
gives  a  turn  to  the  expressions,  which  shews  that 
his  aim  was  to  paint  them  as  odious  as  he  could. 
And  that  especially  in  the  case  of  the  Lyonists :  for 
the  others,  they  could  not  well  be  painted  worse 
than  they  were.  But  these  had  gained  such  a  repute 
by  the  innocence  of  their  lives,  and  the  soundness 
of  their  faith ;  that  they  did  more  hurt  to  the 
church  of  Rome  than  all  the  rest :  therefore  he  does, 
as  any  one  will  perceive,  endeavour  to  blacken  their 
opinions  in  the  recital. 

He  gives  an  account  of  seven  sects  of  these  men^. 
The  Lyonists,  or  poor  men  of  Lyons,  the  Runca- 
rians,  the  Siscidenses,  the  Ortlibenses,  the  Paterins, 
the  Ordibarians,  and  the  Cathari,  or  puritans.  It 
was  of  these  last  that  he  had  been  :  which  held  the 
worst  and  most  blasphemous  opinions  ;  '  That  the 
'  Devil  [or  evil  god]  made  this  world  and  all  things 
'  in  it :  that  all  the  sacraments  of  the  church,  viz- 
'  the  sacrament  of  baj^tism  of  material  water,  and 
'  the  other  sacraments,  profit  nothing  to  salvation, 
'  and    are  no    true    sacraments    of   Christ    and    his 

'  church,  but  vain    and    devilish. Also    that    all 

'  infants,    etiam  non  baptizati,   even   those   that  are 

e  Lib.  adv.  Waldenses,  cap.  5,  6.  apiid  Bibl.  Patr.  torn.  13. 
edit.  Colon.  1618.  [p.  297,  &c.] 


of  the  Cathari.  253 

'  not  baptized,  are  punished  eternall}^  no  less  than  chap. 
*  murderers  and  thieves  V    After  a  great  many  horrid      ^^^' 


opinions,  he  describes  a  practice   which  they  used  ^^^'"  ^^'"" 
instead  of  baptism.     They  called  it  the  consolation  s^sties. 
and   t/ie  spiritual  baptism,   or  the  haptism   icith   the 
Holy  Spirit.     It  had  no  use  of  water,  nor  of  the 
Christian  form  of  baptism. 

It  is  remarkable  what  he  says  of  one  sect  of  these 
Cathari :  that  they  held  '  that  Christ  did  not  take 
'  on  him  human  nature  of  the  blessed  Virgin,  but 
'  took  on  him  a  body  that  was  heavenly  [or  from 
'  heaven].'  This  was  the  opinion  of  some  old 
heretics,  and  is  said  to  be  held  by  the  present 
Minnists. 

He  says,  the  first  of  this  sect  came  from  Bulgaria, 
and  a  country  that  he  calls  Dugranicia.  They  were 
doubtless  an  offspring  of  tlie  old  jManichees ;  who, 
as  well  as  these  later,  made  use  of  the  name  of 
Jesus  Christ,  but  denied  the  true  history  of  him  ; 
and  framed  a  notion  of  him  more  enthusiastical  than 
that  which  the  worst  sort  of  our  Quakers  do  by  the 
name  of  Jesus  Christ  within  them. 

These  Cathari,  it  seems,  thought  water-baptism 
a  devilish  thing:  but  that  even  without  it  infants 
(and  men  too  that  were  not  initiated  in,  and  rescued 
by  their  rites)  Mould  be  damned,  as  being  of  the 
Devil's  make.  Yet  here,  the  Albanenses,  one  sect 
of  the  Cathari,  dissent,  Reinerius  says ;  and  say, 
'  No  creature  of  the  good  God  shall  perish.'  I  sup- 
pose they  meant,  that  their  body  shall  be  damned ; 
but  their  soul,  because  that  is  made  by  the  good 
God,  shall  be  saved. 

The  Runcarians  and  Paterins  say  likewise,   '  that 

f  Cap.  6.  g  IConsolamentUDi.] 


254  Reinerius'  Account 

CHAP.  '  Lucifer   created    all    visible    tliiiif^s.'     One    would 

VII 

L_  think  these  should  be  the  same  that  others  call  the 


Araw-'"  Luciferians ;  but  that  Pilichdorf,  in  the  place  I 
sties.  mentioned,  distinguishes  them.  These  (and  the 
Ortlibenses  and  Siscidenses,  of  whom  he  says  little) 
have  nothing  about  baptism.  The  Siscidenses,  he 
says,  hold  the  same  as  the  Waldenses :  '  save  that 
'  they  receive  the  communion.'  Now  whom  he 
means  by  the  Waldenses  I  know  not ;  for  this  is 
the  only  place  where  he  uses  the  name.  This  man 
I '54- wrote  anno  1254. 

The  Ordibarians  say,  '  The  world  had  no  begin- 
*  ning;  that  Christ  was  a  sinner  till  he  became  of 
'  their  sect.  They  deny  the  resurrection  of  the 
'  body,  but  not  the  immortality  of  the  spirit  [or 
'  soul]  :  they  say,  baptism  is  of  no  further  value 
'  than  are  the  merits  of  the  baptizer  :  and  that  it 
'  does  no  good  to  infants,  unless  they  be  perfect  in 
'  that  sect.'  So  the  words  are ;  nisi  sint  perfecti  in 
ilia  secta.  I  think  they  mean,  unless  they  be  ini- 
tiated in  that  sect,  TeKeiovixevoL. 

Of  the  Lyonists  he  says  thus'^ : 

*  There  is  no  sect  more  pernicious  to  the  church 
'  than  they,'  &c. 

Of  the  sacraments  he  says,  '  they  condemn  them 
'  all.'  This  appears  to  be  invidiously  expressed ; 
for,  by  his  own  account  of  the  particulars,  they  did 
(to  say  the  worst)  only  hold  some  heterodox  opin- 
ions about  them. 

First,  for   baptism,   '  they  say  that   catechism   is 

'  nothing.'     This  also  must  be  maliciously  worded ; 

for  no  people  ever,  that  believed  the  articles  of  the 

Creed,  would  hold  catechising  of  children  to  be  useless. 

h  Cap.  4. 


of  the  Waidenses.  355 


But  I  guess  by  catechism  here  is  meant  the  interro-   chap. 
gations  and  answers  at  the  baptizing  of  an  infant.      ^ '^" 


Also,  that  the  washiupf  that  is  given  to  children  Y^'^'"  ^'"'^'" 

■^  "  the  apo- 

'  does  no  good.'  By  words  so  short  one  cannot  telbties. 
which  of  these  three  tenets  he  w^ould  accuse  them  to 
hold  :  either,  1,  that  all  baptismal  washing  is  good 
for  nothing.  For  so  a  Quaker  now  would  say,  '  the 
'  washing  you  give  your  children  is  good  for  no- 
'  thing  :'  when  his  meaning  is,  that  all  baptism  is 
so.  But  these  people  do  not  seem  to  have  been 
Manichees.  Or,  2ndly,  that  baptism  is  of  no  force 
when  it  is  given  to  infants.  But  then  it  would  have 
been  plainer  expressed  :  and  he  would  have  used  the 
word  haptisjnus,  and  not  aUuHo,  which  is  spoken 
in  disdain,  and  signifies  an  ordinary  washing.  Or, 
3dly,  that  in  baptism,  the  washing  itself,  or  out- 
ward act  taken  by  itself,  is  not  that  which  saves, 
but  God  operating  saves  by  it,  as  St.  Peter  says  '\ 
It  is  not  the  ivasJiincj  off  the  dirt  of  the  flesh  that 
saves.  This  last  I  take  to  be  what  they  might  be 
likely  to  say.  And  this  was  a  great  heresy  in  those 
times,  to  deny  that  the  sacraments  do  confer  grace, 
ea?  opere  operato  :  '  even  by  the  mere  outward  work 
*  done.'  Also,  '  that  the  godfathers  do  not  under- 
'  stand  what  they  answer  to  the  priest.'  Also,  '  that 
'  the  offering  which  is  called  amvegung  is  an  inven- 
'  tion.'  Also,  '  they  dislike  all  the  exorcisms  and 
'  benedictions  of  baptism.' 

Here  is  evidence  more  than  enough  that  there 
were  several  sects  of  this  people.  Which  is  what 
I  proposed  to  prove  by  these  passages. 

V.  And  now,  secondly,  that  some  of  them  (I  do 
not  say,   any  of  the  Waidenses  strictly  so  called; 

•    I  Ep.  iii.  2  I. 


256  TJie  Petrobrusians  deny 

CHAP,  but  some  of  these  sects,  which  about  the  same  time 
and  the  same  places  opposing  the  church  of  Rome, 


learafier  ^  therefore  br  late  writers  huddled  toofether  under 

the  apo-  -  '^ 

the  name  of  Waldenses  ;  that  some  of  these,  I  say) 
did  deny  infants'  baptism,  there  is  this  ground  of 
probability. 

First,  one  Evervinus  of  the  diocese  of  Cologne, 

1040.  a  little  before  the  year  1140.  writes  to  St.  Bernard 

a  letter,   (which   is   lately  brought   to   light   by  F. 

Mabillon,  Analect.  torn,  iii.)^  gi^ng  him  an  account 

of  two   sorts   of  heretics   lately   discovered  in  that 

country.     One  sort  were,  by  his  description,  perfect 

3klanichees.     Of    the    other    sort,    he    says ;  *  They 

condemn    the    sacraments,    except    baptism    only: 

and  this  only  in  those  who  are  come  to  age,  who 

they  say  are  baptized  by  Christ  himself,  whoever 

be  the  minister  of  the  sacraments.     They  do  not 

believe  infant-baptism  :  alleging  that  place  of  the 

Gospel ;  he   that  beliereth,   and   Is   baptized  J    &.c. 

All   marriage    they   call    fornication,    except    that 

which  is  between  two  virgins,'  <Scc. 

1C46.      Then  at  the  year  1146,  Peter,  abbot  of  Clugny, 

writing  against  one  Peter  Bruis,  and  one  Henry  his 

disciple,   and  their  associates  ^   charges   them   with 

six  errors  :  the  first  of  which   was  their  denial   of 

infant-baptism.     The    other    five    were :    2.    *  that 

*  churches  ought  not  to  be  built ;  and  if  built,  ought 

*  to  be  pulled  do^n.'  If  we  were  to  credit  all  the 
reports  that  come  now  from  France,  the  Cevennois 
would  seem  to  be  of  this  opinion,  by  their  destroy- 
ing so  many  churches :  but  I  hope  that  those  re- 

^  [And  p.  473,  of  the  later  edition,  fol.  Paris,  1723.] 
1  Epist.  contra  Petrobrusianos,   [aped  Bibl.  Patrnm,  torn.  xii. 
p.  206,  &c.  edit.  Colon.  161 S.] 


In  fa  n  t-Bapi  ism .  25  T 

ports    are    not    tnie.     3.   'That    crosses   ouofht    Dot  chap. 

.  VII 

'  to  be  worshipped,  but  broken  and  burnt.'     Peter 


Bruis  had  been,  a  little  before  the  writing-  of  this,  \®^  ^^ 

c  '  the  apo- 

taken  and  burnt  himself.  This  writer  says,  it  was^des. 
a  just  judgment  on  him,  who  had  burnt  so  many 
crosses.  4.  '  That  not  onlv  what  Bereus^arius  had 
'  said,  viz.  "  That  there  is  no  transubstantiation  in 
'  the  sacrament,"  was  true  :  but  also  that  that  sacra- 
'  ment  is  no  more  to  be  administered  since  Christ's 
'  time.'  5.  '  That  dead  men  receive  no  benefit  from 
'  the  prayers,  sacrifices,  &:c.  of  the  living.'  6.  '  That 
'  it  is  a  mocking  of  God  to  sing  in  the  church.' 

He  also  says,  that  they  were  reported  to  •'  renounce 
'  all  the  Old  Testament,  and  all  the  Xew,  except  the 

•  four  Gospels.'  But  this  he  was  not  sure  of:  and 
would  not  impute  it  to  them,  for  fear  he  might 
slander  them.  So  it  appears  that  he  did  not  cer- 
tainly know  what  they  held.  Yet  to  make  his 
proofs  unquestionable,  he  first  proves  the  truth  of 
the  Acts  of  the  Apostles  and  the  Epistles,  by  their 
agreement  with  the  Grospels :  and  then  the  Old 
Testament  by  the  Xew.  And  then  out  of  the  whole 
proceeds  to  refute  their  tenets,  bestowing  a  chapter 
on  each.  The  first  of  them  was.  as  I  said,  acrainst 
infant-baptism  ;  and  is  thus  expressed. 

The  first  proposition  of  the  new  heretics.  Thev 
say, 

'  Christ  sending  his  disciples  to  preach,  savs  in 
'  the  Gospel ;  Go  ye  out  into  all  the  world,  and 
'  preach  the  Gospel  to  every  creature.  He  that  be- 
'  liereih  and  is  baptized,  shall  be  saved :  but  he  that 
'  helieveth  not.  shall  be  damned.     From  these  words 

*  of  our  Sa-s-iour  it  is  plain  that  none  can  be  saved 
'  unless  he  believe  and  be  baptized  ;  that  is,  have 

WALI..    VOL.  IT.  S 


258  The  Peti'obrasians  deny 

CHAP.    '  both  Christian  faith  and  baptism.     For  not  one  of 
these,  but  both  together,  does  save.     So  that  in- 


VII. 


Year  after  «  fants,  though  they  be  by  you  baptized,  yet  since 

sties.         *  by  reason  of  their  age  they  cannot  believe,  are  not 

'  saved.     It  is  therefore  an  idle  and  vain  thing  for 

'  you   to  wash   persons  with  water,  at   such  a  time 

•  when  you  may  indeed  cleanse  their  skin  from  dirt 
'  in  a  human  manner,  but  not  purge  their  souls  from 
'  sin.  But  we  do  stay  till  the  proper  time  of  faith : 
'  and  when  a  person  is  capable  to  know  his  God,  and 
'  believe  in  him  ;  then  we  do  (not,  as  you  charge  us, 
'  rebaptize  him,  but)  ba]3tize  him.  For  he  is  to  be 
'  accounted  as  not  yet  baptized,  who  is  not  washed 

*  with  that  baptism  by  which  sins  are  done  away.' 

This  is,  as  to  the  ])ractice,  perfectly  agreeable 
with  the  modern  antipsedobaptists :  but,  as  Cassan- 
der  observes'",  it  is  upon  quite  contrary  grounds. 
For  the  antipaedobaptists  now  do  generally  hold, 
that  all  that  die  infants,  baptized  or  not,  of  Christian 
or  of  heathen  parents,  are  saved ;  and  so  it  is 
needless  to  baptize  them  :  whereas  these  held  that, 
bai)tized  or  not,  they  could  not  be  saved  ;  and  so  it 
was  to  no  purpose  to  baptize  them.  And  this  writer 
does  accordingly  spend  most  of  the  chapter,  which  is 
in  answer  to  this  tenet  of  theirs,  in  proving  that 
infants  as  well  as  grown  men  are  capable  of  the 
kingdom.     '  Abate,'    says    he,    'of  that    overmuch 

'  severity  which   you   have  taken  upon  you, 

'  and  do  not  exclude  infants  from  the  kingdom  of 
'  heaven  ;  of  whom  Christ  says,  Of  such  is  the  hing- 
'  dom  of  heaven^  Also  he  argues  that  the  infants 
of  the  Jews  had  a  ])ossibility  of  being  saved,  viz. 
if  they  were   circumcised  ;    and  if  the   children  of 

'"  De  Baptismo  Infantium. 


iMH^"^^^!!!^ 


Infant-Baptimi.  259 

Christians  have  no  means  to  be  saved,  we  are  in  much  chap. 
worse  case  than   they :  and  at  last  he  concludes  that     ^'"' 
chapter:  'Oh  the  difference  that  is  between  mercy ^'''^'" '*'''"■ 

-  ,  ,  "^  the  apo- 

'  and  cruelty,  between  a  tender  regard  to  one's  chil->^ties. 
'tlren,  and  unnaturalness,  between  Christ   lovingly 
'  receiving  infants,  and  the  heretics  impiously  repel- 

*  ling  them,'  &c. 

It  is  to  be  noted,  that  this  author  speaks  of  this 
opinion  as  then  lately  set  on  foot ;  and  says,  it  might  1026. 
have  seemed  not  to  need  or  deserve  any  confutation, 
'  were   it   not    that    it   had  now   continued    twenty 

*  years".     That  the  first  seeds  of  it  were  sown  by 

*  Peter  de  Bruis'(who  was  living  when  the  book  was 
written,  but  put  to  death  before  it  was  published,  of 
which  mention  is  made  in  the  preface).  It  was  first 
vented  in  the  mountainous  country  of  Dauphine, 
and  had  had  there  some  followers:  from  whence 
being  in  good  measure  expelled,  it  had  got  footing 
in  Gascoigne,  and  the  parts  about  Tholouse,  being 
propagated  by  Hemy,  who  was  a  disciple  and  suc- 
cessor of  the  said  Peter. 

This  writer  aggravates  this  charge  of  novelty,  by 
urging,  that  if  baptism  given  in  infancy  be  null  and 
void,  as  they  pretended;  then  'all  the  world  has 
'  been  blind  hitherto,  and  by  bajitizing  infants  for 
^  above  a  thousand  years,  has  given  but  a  mock-bap- 
'  tism,  and  made  but  fantastical  Christians,  &c 

*  And  whereas    all   France,  Spain,  Germany,  Italy, 

*  and  all  Eurojie,  has  had  never  a  person  noAv  for 
'  three  hundred  or  almost  five  hundred  years  bap- 
'  tized  otherwise  than  in  infancy,  it  has  had  never 

*  a  Christian  in  it,' 

The  next  year  1147.     Bernard,  abbot  of  Clareval,  1047. 

"  Praefatio  et  iiiitium  libri.    [p.  206.  G.  et  208.  B.] 
S  2 


«=r~-JSaB«r5SK2;!?35'' 


260  They  thought  no  Infant  saved. 

CHAP,   commonly  called  St.  Bernard,  was  desired  by  pope 
'      Eiigenius  to  accompany  some  bishops  whom  he  sent 
^hra^'^"^'^  into   those    parts,    to  stop    the   spreading    of  these 
sties.  doctrines,  and  to  reduce  those  that  had  been  led  into 

them.  And  when  they  were  come  nigh  to  the  ter- 
ritory of  the  earl  of  St.  Gyles',  Bernard  writes  a 
letter  to  the  said  earl",  who  at  that  time  harboured 
the  foresaid  Henry  in  his  country,  recounting  what 
mischiefs  that  heretic,  as  he  calls  him,  had  done. 
'  The  churches  are  without  people,  the  ])eople  witli- 
'  out    priests,  &c.     God's    holy   place    is    accounted 

*  profane,  the  sacraments  are  esteemed  unholy,  &c. 
'  Men  die  in  their  sins,  their  souls  carried  to  that 
'  terrible  judicature,  alas  !  neither  reconciled  by  pe- 
'  nance,  nor  strengthened  by  the  holy  communion  : 

*  the  infants  of  Christians  are  hindered  from  the  life 
'  of  Christ,  the  grace  of  baptism  being  denied  them  : 
'  nor  are  they  suffered  to  come  to  their  salvation, 
'  though  our  Saviour  compassionately  cry  out  in 
'  their  behalf,  saying,  Suffer  little  children  to  come 

*  to  me'  &c.  He  tells  the  earl,  that  it  is  little  for 
his  credit  to  harbour  such  a  man  that  had  been  ex- 
pelled from  all  places  of  France  where  he  had 
come.     The  issue  was,  Henry  was  banished. 

I  know  not  whether  it  was  before  this,  or  after,  (I 
think  it  was  after,)  that  St.  Bernard  writing  his 
sixty-fifth  and  sixty-sixth  Sermon  on  the  Canticles p, 
takes  occasion  to  discourse  largely  against  a  sort  of 
heretics,  whom  he  names  not,  but  says  they  called 
themselves  apostolical  men.  He  describes  them 
thus  in  several  places  of  those  two  sermons  :  1st, 
'  that  they  held  it  unlawful  to  swear  in  any  other 

o  Epist  240.   [Op.  torn.  ii.  p.  275.  edit.  Paris.  1586.] 
P  [Op.  torn.  i.p.  988,  &c.] 


wmm 


Alanlchees  with  the  Petrohi'imans.  261 

'case:   but   beins:   examined   of   their    tenets,   thev  chap. 

.                           .            .                 ,  VII. 

'  would  swear  and  forswear  in  the  denial  of  them.'  ' 


And   that   '  to   conceal   their   opinions,   they  would  J.g'^  Jjj!^'' 
'  give    catholic    answers    to    all    questions    of    the^t'es. 
'  faith ;  they  would  go  to  church,  shew  respect  to 
'  the   minister,   offer    their  gift,   receive    the    sacra- 
'  ment,'  &c.     He   shews  by  Scripture  that  all  true 
reliofion  owns  itself.     And  this  receivinor  the  com- 
munion  in  dissimulation,  is  what   Reinerius,   about 
a  hundred  years  after  this  time,  observes,  that  the  1154- 
Siscidenses  would  then  do,  and  the  Lyonists,  he  says, 
would  ;   but   the  Waldenses  would   not.     2.  '  That 
'  they   held   marriage  to  be  a  wicked   uncleanness, 

*  (only  some  of  them  said  that  virgins  might  marry, 

*  but  none  else,)  and  yet  they  kept  company  with 
'  women  in  a  M^ay  that  gave  great  scandal :  and 
'  women  used  to  run  away  from  their  husbands 
'  and  come  and  live  with  them.  That  they  held 
'  uncleanness  to  be  only  in  the  use  of  a  wife :' 
whereas  that  is,  as  he  shews,  the  only  case  which 
makes  it  to  be  none.     3.  '  That  they  held  the  eating 

*  of  all  flesh,  and  milk,  and  whatever  is  generated 
'  of  copulation,  unlawful.  He  says  if  they  did  this 
out  of  desire  to  keep  under  the  body,  he  would  not 
blame  them  :  but  if  it  was  out  of  a  Manichean  ])rin- 
ciple,  (for  this  as  well  as  the  foregoing  was  a  tenet 
of  the  old  Manichees,)  they  fell  under  that  censure 
of  the  apostle*!,  teaching  doctrines  of  devils — -forbid- 
ding to  mrn'ry,  and  commanding  to  abstain  from 
meats,  &c.      4.  '  That    they    owned    not    the    Old 

*  Testament,  and  some  of  them  none  of  the  New, 

*  but  the  Gospels.'  5.  '  That  they  denied  purgatory.' 
6.  '  They  laugh  at  us,'  says  he,  '  for  baptizing  infants, 

4    I  Tim.  iv,  1.  ^. 


262  Manichees  with  the  Petrobrusicms. 

CHAP,  'for  our  praying  for  the  dead,  and  for  desiring  the 
'      *  prayers  of  the  saints.'    So  he  gives  in  opposition  to 
Year  after  them  the  grounds  of  infant-baptism,  as  well  as  of  the 
sties.  other  doctrines  by  them  denied. 

The  heretics  he  speaks  of  here,  appear  plainly  to 
have  been  of  Maniehean  principles ;  and  so  probably 
to  have  derided  all  baptism  :  whereas  Henry,  as  well 
as  Peter  Bruis,  allowed  of  water-baptism  to  the  adult : 
so  that  probably  these  mentioned  in  the  sermons  are 
not  the  same  with  those  in  the  letter ;  for  Peter  and 
Henry  are  charged  with  no  Maniehean  doctrine,  save 
that  Peter  of  Clugny  had  heard  some  say,  that  they 
denied  all  the  Scripture  but  the  Gospels ;  but  he  owns 
that  he  had  no  certain  account  of  that :  and  i)robably 
the  report  that  imputed  it  to  them  arose  by  mistaking 
the  tenets  of  these  for  those. 
1092.  Then  at  the  year  1192,  one  Alanus  reckoning  up 
the  opinions  of  the  Cathari,  says,  some  of  them  held 
baptism  of  no  use  to  infants ;  others  of  them  to  no 
persons  at  all. 

It  is  to  be  noted,  that  neither  Petras  nor  Bernard 
do  call  them  that  they  write  against,  Waldenses; 
nor  do  so  nmch  as  mention  the  name :  nor  was  there, 
I  believe,  any  such  name  then  known. 

These  are  the  only  four  writers  that  I  know  of,  that 
do  plainly  accuse  those  they  write  against,  of  denying 
baptism  frecuUarly  to  infants.  And  the  only  persons 
they  mention  are,  that  Peter  and  Henry,  and  their 
followers :  for  those  of  Cologne  seem  to  have  rambled 
thither  from  Dauphine,  where  Bruis  had  begun  to 
preach  about  twenty  years  before. 

Mr.  Stennet,  in  his  answer  to  Russen,  ch.  iv.  p.  84, 

would  indeed  have  us  believe  that  there  were,  above 

925  one  hundred  years  before  tliis  time,  viz.  anno  1025, 


HPV 


Manichees  tvith  the  Petrohrusians.  263 

some    that    denied    baptism    peculiarly    to    infants,  (^'hap. 

namely,   the    followers    of   Gundulphus.     For    this,  '■ 

he  quotes  a  passage  reported  by  Dr.  Allix"-  from  J^rapo-'^'^ 
the  history  of  a  synod  held  at  Arras  that  year,'''*^'- 
which  is  lately  brought  to  light  by  Dacherius, 
Spicileg.  tom.  xiii,  where  these  men,  beino-  ex- 
amined  by  the  bishop  of  Cambray,  do  indeed  deny 
that  baptism  can  do  any  good  to  infants.  But  in 
the  same  examination  being  farther  interrogated, 
the  men  confessed  that  they  thought  water-baptism 
of  no  use  or  necessity  to  any  one,  infant  or  adult. 
Now  this  is  not  fair  quoting,  to  take  the  first  of 
these,  and  leave  out  the  latter  part  which  follows 
in  Dr.  Allix's  book.  These  men,  whom  M\\  Stennet 
represents  as  antipaedobaptists,  (and  if  they  had  been 
so,  they  would  have  been  the  earliest  that  any  history 
mentions,)  were,  as  to  the  point  of  baptism,  Quakers 
or  Manichees. 

And  so  all  the  other  writers  that  I  have  seen 
(except  the  four  aforesaid)  do,  if  they  have  any 
thing  at  all  about  the  denial  of  baptism,  impute 
to  the  heretics  they  speak  of,  the  denial  of  all 
water-baptism.  As  the  fragments  of  the  history  of 
Aquitain,  cited  by  Pithaeus ;  Joannes  Floriacensis 
cited  by  Massonius ;  Radul})hus  Ardensis,  and  many 
more,  whose  sayings  are  produced  by  Ijishop  Ussher^ 
The  words  of  Eckbertus  I  gave  before  S  *  that  in- 
*  fants  ought  to  have  no  baptism,  and  grown  per- 
'  sons  no  water-baptism.'  Reinerius,  as  I  said,  about 
the   Lyonists   speaks   ambiguously.     Erbrardus   and 

«■  [In  his  '  Remarks  on  the  Ancient  Churches  of  Piedmont,' 
chap,  ii.] 

s   Lib.  de  Success.  Eccles.  [cap.  viii.  §.  22.]  *  §-4. 


264  Manichees  ivith  the  Petrobrmians. 

CHAP.  Ermino'ardns  are  cited  by  Danvers",  as  witnesses  that 

VII  ... 

-  some  of  whom  they  write  denied  infant-baptism  :  but 


Year  after  Mr.  Baxter  having"  searched  them  says^,  that  thev 

the  apo-  O  J       ^  ^ 

sties.  speak  of  those  people  as  denying  the  law  and  the 

prophets :  maintaining  the  two  gods,  w^hereof  the 
evil  one  made  the  world  :  denying  the  resurrection, 
and  all  use  of  marriage,  or  the  lawfulness  of  it. 
So  that  they  must  have  been  Manichees,  who  do 
all  of  them  deny  all  baptism,  but  especially  infant- 
baptism. 

William  of  Newburg,  who  lived  then  in  England, 
describes  some  of  these  men  bv  the  name  of  Publi- 
cani,  and  by  their  being  Gascoigners ;  and  says^, 
about  thirty  of  them  came  out  of  Germany  into 
1070.  England  under  Henry  II,  about  1170,  and  being 
examined  of  their  faith,  they  denied  and  detested 
holy  baptism,  the  eucharist,  and  marriage.  Foxe^ 
out  of  Historia  Gisburnensis,  mentions  the  same 
men:  and  that  the  chief  of  them  were  Gerhardus 
and  Dulcinus  Navarensis.  He  gives  no  account  of 
any  opinion  they  had  against  baptism.  But  Holin- 
shed^  says,  they  derogated  from  the  sacraments 
such  grace,  as  the  church  by  her  authority  had 
then  ascribed  to  them. 

Several  councils  and  decretals  made  about  this 
time  do  establish  the  doctrine  of  ba])tism  both  in 

u  Treatise,  part  ii.  ch.  7.  p.  250.  [Danvers  however  mispells 
the  latter  name,  Ermengendus.'] 

"  More  Proofs,  p.  394. 

y  [Gulielmi  Neubrigensis  Historia  rerum  Anghcarum,  cura 
Tho.  Hearnii,  3  torn.  8°.  Oxonii,  1719.]  lib.ii.  cap.  13. 

z    [Acts  and  Monuments,  vol.  i.  p.  262.  edit.  1641.] 

a   [Chronicles,  year  1  160.  vol.  iii.  p.  68.  edit.  1586.] 


m 


Councils  against  deniers  of  Infant-Baptism.  265 

general,    and    also   particularly   that   of   infants,    in   chap. 
opposition,    as  it  seems,   to    some    that    denied    all 


baptism,  and  to  others  that  denied  that  of  infants.  V^""  ^*^'^'' 

^  '  theapo- 

As   for    example,  the    Lateran   council   under  pope^'^'^'^- 
Innocent  III,  anno  1215,  cap.  i.  'The  sacrament  of"i5- 

*  baptism  performed  in  water  with  invocation  of 
'  the  Trinity  is  profitable  to  salvation,  both  to  adult 
'  persons   and   also  to  infants,   by  whomsoever  it  is 

*  rightly  administered  in  the  form   of  the  church.' 
And  the  said  pope  has  in  his  Decretals  a  letter  in 
answer    to    a    letter   from   the  bishop    of   Aries   in  1099. 
Provence,  which  had  represented  to  him  that '  some'^ 

'  heretics  there  had  taught  that  it  was  to  no  purpose 
'  to    baptize    children,    since    they    could    have    no 

*  forgiveness  of  sins  thereby,  as  having  no  faith, 
'  charity,'  &c. 

Also  the  Lateran  council  under  Innocent  II,  1139,  '039- 
did  condemn  Peter    Bruis,  and  Arnold   of  Brescia, 
who  seems  to  have   been  a  follower  of   Bruis,  for 
rejecting  infants'  baptism. 

These  proofs  do,  I  think,  evince  that  there  were 
some  about  this  time  that  denied  all  baptism  ;  and 
some  others  that  denied  peculiarly  infant- baptism  ; 
among  those  parties  of  men  that  have  been  lately 
called  Waldenses. 

I  know  many  paedobaptists  believe  neither  of 
these,  and  Perrin  their  historian  does  endeavour  to 
clear  them  of  this  as  of  a  slander.  Two  things  the 
paedobaptists  say  to  this  matter,  which  are  very 
considerable. 

1.  That  it  is  common  for  men  to  slander  their 
adversaries  about  the  opinions  they  hold :  as  appears 

t*  Opera  lunocentii  Tertii,  torn.  ii.  p.  776.  edit.  Colon.  1575. 


^66  Most  of  the  Waldenses  practised 

CHAP,   not  only  by  many  instances   in   that  ignorant  age; 
^^^'      in  which  the  monks,  who  were  then  the  only  writers, 


Year  after  verified  in  themselves  too  much  that  character  quoted 
sties.  by  St.  Paul  **,  always  liars,  evil  beasts^  slow  bellies  ; 
but  also  by  too  many  in  this  age ;  as  Vicecomes  a 
learned  papist  has  in  this  very  matter  to  his  own 
shame  ^  left  on  record,  that  Luther,  Calvin,  and  Beza 
were  adversaries  of  infant-baptism. 

2.  That  we  ought  in  all  reason  either  to  deny 
credit  to  these  popish  writers  concerning  these  men, 
or  else  to  believe  them  in  one  thing  as  well  as  an- 
other. If  we  allow  them  for  good  witnesses,  then 
those  that  they  describe  were  men  of  such  unsound 
opinions  in  other  things,  as  that  no  church  would 
be  willing  to  own  them  for  predecessors  ;  but  if 
we  account  them  slanderers,  we  ought  not  to  con- 
clude from  their  testimony  that  any  of  these  men 
denied  infant-baptism ;  which  does  not  appear  by 
any  of  their  own  confessions,  and  which  the  pre- 
sent Waldenses  do  account  as  a  slander  cast  on  their 
ancestors. 

These  considerations  do  in  great  measure  justify 
those  psedobaptists,  who  maintain  that  there  is  no 
certain  evidence  of  any  church  or  society  of  men 
that  opposed  infant-baptism,  till  those  in  Germany 
1422.  about  180  years  ago.  The  proof  concerning  any 
sort  of  the  Waldenses  is  but  probable.  I  owned 
before  that  the  probability  is  such  as  does  weigh 
with  me  for  the  Petrobrusians,  and  perhaps  some  of 


b  Titus  i.  12. 

c  De  Rit.  Bapt.  ib.  ii.  cap.  i.  [See  Joseph!  Vicecomitis  Ob- 
servatioues  Ecclesiasticte,  4  torn.  40.  Mediolani,  1615,  &c.  torn.  i. 
p.  103.] 


Infant- Baptism.  267 

the  Albigenses.     But  for   the  main   body  of  Wal-  chap. 
denses  there  is  no  probability  at  all. 


VI.  And  now,  thirdly,  that  there  were  several  J;^^;;p^J_^^'" 
sects  or  sectaries  of  them  that  did  not  deny  the  bap-  sties. 
tism  of  infants,  is  proved  from  this ;  that  a  great 
many  writers  against  them,  diligently  reciting  the 
erroneous  oj)inions  of  those  they  write  against,  and 
that  often  in  smaller  matters,  yet  mention  nothing 
of  this. 

Lucas  Tudensis*^  writes  largely  against  the  Albi-'i36. 
genses  that  were  then  in  Spain  :  but  among  all  the 
accusations  of  them,  true  or  false,  has  nothing  of 
this.  Petrus  de  Pilichdorf  (in  the  year  1395,  as  1295- 
he  himself  gives  the  date,  cap.  30,)  writes  a  book 
of  confutation  of  the  several  pretended  errors  of  the 
Waldenses  of  his  time  in  thirty-six  chapters*^,  but 
has  nothing  of  baptism  ;  though  he  descends  to 
speak  of  many  lesser  matters,  and  aggravates  all 
with  very  railing  words,  yet  he  finds  nothing  to  ac- 
cuse them  of,  but  such  things  as  the  protestants  now 
hold,  except  one  or  two,  as  the  '  unlawfulness  of 
'  all  oaths,'  &c.  JiLneas  Sylvius  wrote  in  1458  his  '358- 
Historia  Bohemica,  in  which  he  reckons  up  the 
tenets  of  the  Picards,  a  sort  of  these  men.  But  *" 
he  mentions  no  difference  they  had  with  the  then 
established  church  about  infant  baptism,  save  that 
they  spoke  against  chrism,  &c.  And  Foxe,  reciting 
their   tenets  out  of  him,  mentions   only  this,  '  that 

''  [See  his  work  in  four  books,  in  vol.  13  of  the  Bibliotheca 
Patrum.      Cologne  edition,  1618.] 

e  [See  this  in  the  same  volume  of  the  above-named  col- 
lection.] 

f  Ussher  de  Success.  Eccles.  cap.  6.  [Sect.  15,  16.  p.  80. 
edit.  1687.]      Baxter,  More  Proofs,  &c.  p.  380. 


268  3Iost  of  the  Waldenses  practised 

CHAP.   '  baptism  ought  to  be  atlministered  with  pure  water, 

*  without  any  hallowed  oil.'     Nauclerus  also  in  his 

thrapo-  '  Chronicon,  written  1500,  recites  their  doctrines  par- 
^^^^^'  I  oo  ticularly  ^,  and  mentions  no  such  thing  as  the  denial 
of  infant-baptism ;  yet  he  also  takes  notice  of  so 
small  a  matter,  as  that  they  affirmed  water  to  be 
sufficient  without  oil.  There  are  in  Gretzer's  Col- 
lection ^  of  pieces  written  against  the  Waldenses, 
six  treatises  in  all  (beside  Reinerius  and  Pilichdorf 
mentioned  already)  reckoning  up  their  heretodox 
opinions ;  but  not  one  word  of  this.  One  of  them 
is  a  direction  to  the  inquisitors,  in  the  examining  of 
these  men,  how  to  discover  and  convict  them ;  for 
it  seems  they  kept  their  opinions  very  close ;  where- 
as if  they  had  not  baptized  their  children,  nothing 
would  have  been  a  more  ready  conviction.  The 
Magdeburgenses  '  have  a  catalogue  of  their  opinions, 
taken  as  they  say  out  of  a  very  old  manuscript ;  and 
1360. nothing  of  this.  Bishop  Ussher  quotes^  also  Jacob 
1395-  Picolominseus,  Antonius  Bonfinius,  Bernardus  Lut- 
zenburgensis,  and  several  others  treating  of  these 
sorts  of  men,  who  object  nothing  of  this. 

Vir.  I  have,  more  than  ever  I  meant  to  do,  trou- 
bled myself  in  inquiring  into  the  history  of  these 
men ;  and  all  that  I  can  make  of  the  inquiry  is 
this : 

First,  there  were  a  great  many  among  them  that 
really  held  the  impious  opinion  of  the  Manichees  : 

g  [See  Johannis  Naucleri  Chronica,  fol.  Coloiiiie,  1579.  vol.  ii. 
Generat.  47.  p.  1033.]   Vol.  ii.  part  ii.  p.  265. 

^  Bibl.  Patrum,  torn.  xiii.  edit.  Colon.  161  S. 

i  Cent.  12.  cap.  8.  p.  1206.    [torn.  vii.  edit.  Basil.  1569.] 

!<  De  Success.  Eccles.  cap.  6.  p.  155.  Item,  p.  306,  &c. 
[^p.  80.  et  149,  edit.  fol.  1687.] 


Infant-Baptism.  269 

some  of  this  sect  were  in  these  countries  before  the  chap 
Waklenses,   whom   the   protestants   own  for  prede- 


cessors, arose  or  were  taken  notice  of;  which  was  ^,'^^^;p^J_;^^' 
after  the  year  1100.  These,  all  of  tliem,  denied  alh^^^^- 
water  baptism.  So  the  Quakers  may  claim  kindred 
of  them  if  they  ]>lease ;  but  no  baptist,  whether 
piedobai)tist  or  antipgcdobajitist,  can.  They  had  an 
invention  of  their  own,  ^hich  they  used  instead  of 
the  Christian  baptism,  and  Avhich  they  called  spi- 
ritual baptism:  and  they  said^,  'by  it  forgiveness 
«  of  sins,  and  the  Holy  Spirit  was  given.  It  con- 
'  tained  in  it  imposition  of  their  hands,  and  the  say- 

•  ing  of  the  Lord's  Prayer.  Only  one  sect  of  them, 
'  the  Albanenses,  said  the  hand  did  no  good  ;  being, 
'  as  all  other  flesh  is,  created  by  the  Devil.  So  they 
'  used  the  prayer  only.' 

These  men  were  thus  far  on  the  antipa?dobaptists' 
side,  that  this  mock-baptism  of  theirs  they  gave  to 
the  adult  only.  And  they  derided  the  Christians 
for  two  things:  one,  that  they  used  baptism  with 
water  at  all  ;  and  the  other,  that  they  gave  it  to 
persons  that  had  no  sense  of  it,  viz.  infants.  And 
this,  for  ought  I  know,  might  be  all  the  ground  of 
the  Waklenses  (who  by  the  first  writers  are  not 
well  distinguished  from  these  men)  being  accused  of 
denying  infant-baptism. 

This  sort  of  men  continued  a  considerable  time. 
Reinerius  says™,  in  his  time  '  there  was  not  above  "54. 

*  4000  in  all  the  world  that  were  Cathari,  quite  pure 
'  [or  perfect]  of  both  sexes ;  but  of  Credentes  (so 
'  they  called  their  disciples  that  were  not  yet  per- 
'  feet)  an  innumerable  multitude.' 

1  Reinerius,  cap.  6.  "^  Ibid. 


270  Most  of  the  Waldemes  practised 

CHAP.        Though  the  authors  do   not  well  disthio-uish  the 

Vil.  *  .  . 
names,  yet  most  generally  this  sort,  that  denied  all 

thn  o?^'   baptism,  and  held  the  other  vile  opinions,  are   de- 

sties.  noted    by  these    names,   Cathari,   Apostoliei,   Luci- 

ferians,  Runcarians,  Popelicans,  alias  Publicans. 

2.  There  were  another  sort  that  held  none  of 
those  impious  tenets  of  the  Manichees,  concerning 
two  Gods,  &c.  But  they  joined  with  the  other  in 
inveighing  against  the  church  of  Rome,  which  in 
these  times  began  to  be  very  corrupt.  And  the 
papists  do  sometimes  confound  these  with  the  other, 
and  affix  to  these  some  of  the  opinions  of  the 
other. 

If  any  of  these  that  owned  water- baptism  denied 
it  to  infants,  and  if  Petrus  Cluniacensis  did  not 
mistake  their  opinion  upon  the  occasion  aforesaid, 
it  was  the  Petrobrusians,  otherwise  called  Henri- 
cians.  What  Reinerius  says  of  the  Lyonists  is  very 
general  and  obscure :  and  of  the  others  no  such 
thing  is  said.  Especially  this  is  constant ;  that  no 
one  author  that  calls  the  people  he  writes  of  Wal- 
denses,  does  impute  to  them  the  denial  of  infant- 
baptism. 

3.  If  there  were  any  such,  they  seem  not  to  have 
continued  long,  but  to  have  dwindled  away  or  come 
over  to  those  that  practised  infant-ba])tism ;  for 
none  of  the  later  writers  concerning  these  men  do 
charge  them  with  any  thing  of  this.  This  the 
reader  will  observe,  if  he  mind  the  date  of  the  year 
which  I  have  affixed  to  each  writer.  And  it  is  a 
manifest  sign  that  either  none  of  those  whom  we 
now  denote  by  the  name  Waldenses,  that  owned 
water-baptism,  held  any  thing  against  infant-bap- 
tism ;  but  that  the  elder  writers  imputed  it  to  them 


I/ffa/it-Bapfism.  271 

upon  the   mistake    aforesaid    of   takiiio-    the   JMani-  chap. 
chees'  opinions  for  theirs  ;  or  upon  vulgar  reports. 


Year  after 


which  by  this  time  appeared   to   be  false :  or  else,  ^^^ 
that  if  there  had  been  formerly  any  such  sects  in**^'^*- 
that   great  variety,  they  were   by  this    time  extin- 
guished. 

Pilichdorf  writes  against  them  under  the  name  of 
Waldenses.  Reinerius  does  but  once  just  mention 
that  name,  as  denoting  one  sect :  one  cannot  tell 
which.  But  Pilichdorf  entitles  his  book  Against  the 
Sect  of  the  Waldenses,  and  calls  them  at  every 
word  Waldensian  heretics ;  but  ascribes  no  opinion 
to  them  that  deserves  that  name,  nor  any  error  at 
all  about  baptism.  He  is  the  only  man  of  their 
adversaries,  who  though  he  give  them  ill  language, 
yet  charges  them  with  no  particular  opinion  (or  no 
material  one)  but  what  they  themselves  own  in 
their  confessions.  He  wrote,  as  I  said,  anno  1395, 1295- 
by  which  time  their  opinions  must  be  justly  and 
distinctly  known.  If  they  had  formerly  been  mis- 
taken to  be  of  the  same  opinion  with  those  Mani- 
chean  sects,  they  had  now  had  time  to  clear  them- 
selves from  that  imputation.  And  so  we  find  by  his 
words  they  did;  for  he  says",  the  Waldenses  'do 
'  dislike  and  even  loathe  the  Runcarians,  Beghards, 
'  and  Luciferians.'  And  they  seem  by  his  descrip- 
tion to  have  been  in  the  same  state  of  religion  that 
they  were  found  in  130  years  after  by  the  pro- 1425- 
testants. 

And  he  also  sup])oses  that  from  their  beginning 
they  had  been  free  from  any  false  doctrine  about 
the  sacraments ;  for  in  his  first  chapter  he  speaks 
of  their  original :  that  it  was  from  one  Peter  Wal- 

"  Cap.  12. 


apo- 


272  Petrobrusians  not  'properly 

CHAP,  flensis  (others  call  him  Waldus),  who  in  the  time  of 

VII 

Innocent  the  Second,  (so  he  says,  but  others  place 


Wr  after  j^j^^^  ^^  1 1 60,  wliicli  was  the  time  of  Alexander  the 

the  apo-  ' 

sties.  Third,)  reading  that  command  of  our  Saviour  to  the 
io6o!rich  young  man.  Matt.  xix.  ^1,  (some  others  also 
add,  that  he  was  also  aifrighted  at  the  sudden  death 
of  one  of  his  companions,)  took  a  resolution  of  sell- 
ing all  he  had,  and  giving  it  to  the  poor:  and  was 
imitated  by  some  others,  particularly  one  John  of 
the  city  of  Lyons.  After  a  while  they  took  on  them 
to  preach  ;  and  being  forbid,  (for  they  were  laymen,) 
they  refused  to  forbear,  and  so  were  excommuni- 
cated. Tlien  they  betook  themselves  to  preaching 
privately ;  and,  as  he  adds,  '  out  of  hatred  to  the 
'  clergy  and  the  true  priesthood,  they  began  out  of 
'  the  errors  of  old  heretics,  and  adding  some  new 
'  and  pernicious  articles,  to  destroy,  condemn,  and 
'  reject  all  those  means  by  which  the  clergy,  as  a 
'  good  mother,  do  gather  their  children,  except  the 
'  sacraments  only.' 

He  means,  as  appears  by  what  follows,  they  re^ 
jected  indulgences,  pardons,  canonical  hours,  prayers 
to  the  saints,  &c.  But  if  they  had  rejected  infant- 
baptism,  he  would  not  have  failed  to  have  men- 
tioned that.  By  which  it  appears,  that  either  this 
man  had  never  heard  of  the  Petrobrusians,  or  else 
had  not  heard  that  they  denied  infant-baptism ;  or 
else  did  not  take  them  to  have  been  Waldenses. 

And  in  this  last  mentioned  sense  Cassander" 
speaks  of  the  Petrobrusians,  as  a  sect  that,  together 
with  the  salvation  of  infants,  denied  their  baptism  : 
but  of  the  Waldenses,  as  practising  it. 

o  De  Baptismo  Infantium.  [In  praefatione,  pag.  671.  Oper. 
Omn,  fol.  Paris.  j6i6.] 


called  Waldenses.  273 


The   Petrobrusians  could  not  properly  be   called  *^'^,^^ 
Waldeijses,  because   they  set  up  their  party  before 


Waldus  did    his.     For   Peter    Bruis    had  preached  thelpo.^'^ 
twenty  years  when  Cluniacensis  wrote,  as   I  shewed  ^'^'^^* 
before:  which  was  1146.     And   Waldus  began,   by  j^^g 
the  earliest  account,  in  the  time  of  Pope  Innocent 
the  Second,  whose  first  year  was  1130.  1030- 

So  if  we  take  the  name  [Waldenses]  strictly,  for 
one  sort  of  men,  as  those  old  writers  generally  do  ; 
then  there  is  no  account  that  any  of  them  were  an- 
tipa^dobaptists.  But  if  we  take  it  in  that  large  sense 
as  many  late  writers  do,  to  include  all  the  sorts  that 
I  have  rehearsed,  then  there  is  probable  evidence 
that  one  sort  of  them,  viz.  the  Petrobrusians,  were 
so ;  but  not  that  the  general  body  of  the  Waldenses 
were.  And  that  opinion  of  the  Petrobrusians  seems 
to  have  been  in  a  short  time  extinguished  and 
forofotten. 

VIII.  Now  because  I  take  this  Peter  Bruis  (or 
Bruce  perhaps  his  name  was)  and  Henry  to  be  the 
first  antipgedobaptist  preachers  that  ever  set  up  a 
church  or  society  of  men  holding  that  opinion 
against  infant-baptism,  and  rebaptizing  such  as  had 
been  baptized  in  infancy  ;  I  will,  for  the  sake  of  the 
antipaedobaptists,  give  the  history  of  them,  so  far  as 
it  is  upon  record.  And  the  same  thing  may  gratify 
the  Quakers  ;  for  I  believe  they  were  the  first  like- 
wise of  all  that  have  owned  the  Scri])tures,  (as  I  see 
no  reason  to  conclude  but  this  people  did  ;  though 
there  was  a  report  that  they  I'ejected  some  books  of 
them,)  that  ever  taught  that  the  use  of  receiving  the 
Lord's  Supper  is  not  to  be  continued. 

They  were  both  Frenchmen.     Both  of  mean  rank 

WALL,   VOL.  II.  T 


274  Peter  Bruis  and  Henry ^  the 

CHAP,  or  quality:  for  Peter  of  Clugny  P  bespeaks  them 
'  thus :  '  Because  the  darkness  of  a  mean  condition 
rtiTa^o*''^  '  ^"-^P^  y^^  obscure,  had  you  therefore  a  mind  by 
sties,  '  some  very  wicked  exploit  to  make  yourselves  to  be 
'  taken  notice  ofi?'  Yet  they  had  been  in  priest's 
orders,  and  had  each  of  them  a  place  or  employ- 
ment in  that  office ;  but  the  benefices  belonging  to 
them  were,  it  seems,  but  small.  Because  he  says  ; 
*  If  the  places  wherein  you  ministered  as  presbyters 
'  afforded  you  but  little  gain,  would  you  therefore 
'  resolve  to  turn  all  into  confusion  and  profaneness?' 
Peter  had  had  a  church  or  parish,  but  was  turned 
out  of  it;  and,  as  this  writer  insinuates,  for  some 
misdemeanour.  Henry  had  been  a  monk,  and  had 
deserted  the  monastery.  For  so  he  adds  ;  '  because 
'  one  of  you  was  for  a  reason  (he  knows  why) 
'  turned  out  of  the  church  which  he  had,'  &c.  '  The 
'  other  throwing  off  the  monk's  habit,  turning  an 
'  apostate,'  &c. 

The  places  where  Bruis  first  made  a  party  and 
gained  proselytes  were  in  tha,t  country  which  is  since 
called  Dauphine.  For  the  book,  which  Peter  of  Clugny 
writes  against  them,  is  by  way  of  a  letter  to  three 
bishops,  within  whose  dioceses  this  had  happened : 
and  the  bishops  were  Eberdunensis,  Diensis,  and 
Wapiensis ;  the  bishops  of  Embrun,  Die,  and  Gap. 
In  the  preface  (which   was  written  some  time  after 

p  [See  the  works  of  this  author,  Peter  Mauritius,  abbot  of 
Chigny,  fol.  Paris,  1522:  or,  in  the  collection  entitled  Blhl'i- 
otheca  Cluniacensis ,  fol.  Paris,  1612:  or,  in  vol.  xii.  part  2. 
of  the  Bibliotheca  Fatrum,  Cologne  edition,  fol.  161 8.] 

q  Answer  to  their  fourth  Article.  [Contra  id  quod  dicunt,  Mis- 
sam  nihil  esse  nee  celebrari  debere,  pag.  228.  G.  apud  torn.  xii. 
Bib).  Patr.  edit.  Colon.  161 8.] 


warn. 


First  Preachers  of  Antipwdohaptism.  275 

the  book,  and  after  Bruis  was  dead)  there  is  added   ^^^^" 

the  archbishop  of  Aries  in  Provence.     But  it  is  said 

in  the  book,  that  the  city  of  Aries   itself  was  freothrapo-  ' 

from  the  infection  ;  only  some  parts  of  his  province  **'^^' 

had    een  drawn  into  this  persuasion.     It  was  in  the 

mountainous  and  wild  parts  of  the  said  dioceses  that 

it  first  took  footing :    for  so  Cluniacensis   writes  '' : 

'  I  should  have  thought  that  it  had  been  those  craggy 

'  Alps,  and  rocks  covered  with  continual  snow,  that 

'  had  bred  that  savage   temper  in  the  inhabitants  ; 

'  and  that  your  land,  being  unlike  to  all  other  lands, 

'  had  yielded  a  sort  of  people  unlike  to  all  others  ; 

'  but  that  I  now  perceive,'  &c. 

The  time  that  it  began,  he  mentions  to  have  been 
twenty  years   before.     And   at  the   time  when    the  1026. 
book    was  writ,  (which   was   1146,)   those    foresaid  1046. 
dioceses  were,  he  says,  clear   of  it.     By  the  care  of 
the  said  bishops  it  had  been  rooted  out  there  :  but 
that  the  preachers,  when  expelled  thence,  had  planted 
it  in  the  plain  countries   of  Provincia  Narbonensis. 
And  there,  says  he,  *  the  heresy  which  among  you 
'  was  but  timorously  whispered  or  buzzed  about  in 
'  deserts  and  little   villages,  does   now  boldly   vent 
*  itself  in  great  crowds  of  people,  and  in  populous 
'  towns.'     And  the  places  specified  in  the  books  are, 
the  places  about  the  mouth  of  the  Rhone,  the  plain 
country  about   Tholouse,  and  particularly  that  city 
itself,  and  many  places  in  the  province  of  Gascoigue. 
About  the  year  1144,  Bruis  being  then  in  the  terri-1044. 
tory  of  St.  Gyles',  where  he  had  made  many  prose- 
lytes, he  was,   by  the   zeal   of  the    faithful    people 
(so  Cluniacensis    calls   it)   taken,  and   in  that   city, 
according  to   the  laws   then,  burnt   to  death.     The 

I'  Prope  initium  Epistolee.  [p.  208.  C.  Bibl.  Patr.] 
T    2 


:  ^sscai'  ■ 


276  Peter  Bruis  and  Henry,  the 

CHAP,   time  I  compute  thus:  Cluniacensis  had  wrote  that 

VII.  . 
letter  to  the  bishops  aforesaid ;  but  understanding 

iripl^'''   that    Bruis    was    put    to    death,    and    the    doctrine 

sties.  expelled  out   of  their  dioceses,   he   suppressed    the 

publishing  of  his   letter;  but   hearing  that   Henry, 

whom  he  calls  the  heir  of  Bruis'  wickedness,  did  still 

propagate  it  in   several   places,  and  that  there  was 

danger  of  its  reviving  where  it  seemed  to  be  extinct, 

he  put  a  new  preface  to  his  work  and  published  it ; 

'046.  which  was  in  the  year  1146. 

Of  the  morals  of  Peter  Bruis  this  writer  gives  no 

account,  save  that  he  describes  in  how  tumultuous 

and  outrageous  a  way  things  were  managed  by  him 

and  his  party,  where  they  prevailed  ^ ;  '  The  people 

*  rebaptized  ;  the  churches  profaned  ;  the  altars  dug 

*  up  ;  the  crosses  burnt ;  the  priests  scourged  ;  monks 
'  imprisoned,'  &c.  And  he  tells  how  they  would,  on  a 
Good-Friday  to  choose,  get  together  a  great  pile  of 
crosses  which  they  had  pulled  down,  and  making  a 
fire  of  them,  would  roast  meat  at  it ;  on  which  they 
would  make  a  feast,  in  defiance  of  the  fast  kept  by 
Christians  on  that  day. 

As  for  Henry,  after  he  had  gone  about  preaching 
in  many  cities  and  provinces  of  France,  he  was  on 
the  year  1146  or  7  found  in  the  said  territory  of  the 
earl  of  St.  Gyles',  when  St.  Bernard  and  some  bishops 
came  to  those  parts  to  confute  these  new  doctrines. 
And  of  him  Bernard  does  give  a  character  in  his 
letter  to  that  earl ;  and  it  is  a  very  scurvy  character 
for  a  preacher. 

'  The  man,'  says  he,  '  is  a  renegade,  who,  leaving 
*  off  his  habit  of  religion,  (for  he  was  a  monk,) 
'  returned,  as  a  dog  to  his  vomit,  to  the  filthiness  of 

s  Prope  ab  initio,  [p.  208.  A.  ibid.] 


Year  after 


apo- 


First  Preachers  of  Aniipcedohaptism,  fill 

'the  flesh  and   the  world:  and   beinof   ashamed   to   chap. 

VII. 

*  stay  where  he  was  known,  &c.,  he  became  a  vaga- 
'  bond ;  and  being  in  beggary,  he  made  the  gospel  l-^^^ 

*  maintain  him;  (for  he  is  a  scholar;)  and  setting  to^'i^*- 
'  sale    the   word    of  God,    he    preached    for    bread. 
'  What  he  got  of  the  silly  people,  or  of  the  good 

*  women,  more  than  would  find  him  victuals,  he  spent 
'  in  gaming  at  dice,  or  some  worse  way  ;  for  this 
'  celebrated  preacher,  after  the  day's  applause,  was 

*  at  night  often  found  in  bed  with  whores,  and 
'  sometimes  with  married  women.  Inquire,  if  you 
'  please,  noble  sir,  how  he  left  the  city  Losanna, 
'  what  sort  of  departure  he  made  out  of  jNlayne,  and 
'  also  from  Poictou,  and  from  Bourdeaux :  to  none 
'  of  which  places  he  dares  return,  having  left  such  a 
'  stink  behind  him.'  If  any  one  shall  think  that  in 
the  credit  one  is  to  give  to  this  description  there 
ought  to  be  some  allowance  made  for  the  malice  of 
his  enemies,  I  have  nothing  to  say  against  that. 

He  that  writes  the  life  of  St.  Bernard ^  says,  that 
upon  this  mission  Henry  fled,  and  lying  hid  for 
some  time,  but  '  nobody  being  willing  to  receive 
'  him,  was  at  last  taken  and  delivered  chained  to  the 
'  bishop,'  (the  bishop  of  Ostia,  I  suppose ;  who  was 
a  cardinal,  and  the  chief  man  of  the  mission,)  but 
what  was  done  with  him  is  not  said.  But  of  the 
people  it  is  said,  that  '  those  who  had  erred  were 
'  reduced,    the    wavering    were    satisfied,    and     the 

t  Gaufrid.  lib.  iii.  chap. 5.  [See  the  hfe  of  St.  Bernard,  in 
seven  books,  (three  of  which  are  by  Gaufridus,  his  secretary, 
afterwards  abbot  of  Clairvaux,)  prefixed  to  the  edition  of  Ber- 
nard's works  by  Horstius,  published  at  Lyons  in  folio,  1679, 
book  iii.  chap.  6.  sect.  17.  p.  34.  In  former  editions  only  five 
books  were  given,  and  the  passage  cited  w-as  found  in  chapter  5. 
(not  6.)  as  in  the  edit,  of  1586  :  torn.  ii.  p.  828.] 


278  Peter  Brim  and  Henry,  ^c. 

CHAP.   '  seducers    so    confuted    that    they    durst    nowhere 

VII 

L_  '-  appear.'     And  a  little  after  this,  Bernard  has  a 

Ih.T^^'^^-^  letter   to   the   people   of  Tholouse",   congratulating 

sties.         their   recovery  from  the  confusions  that  had   been 
1048.  ^         '' 

among  them  on  account  of  those  opmions. 

Their  way  of  preaching  against  the  other  sacra- 
ment, of  the  Lord's  Supper,  is  thus  represented  by 
Cluniacensis^:  '  Your  words,  as  near  as  I  can  learn 
'  them,  are  these :  "  Oh  good  people,  do  not  believe 

*  your  bishops,  presbyters,  and  clergymen  that  seduce 
'  you.     As  they  deceive  you  in  many  other  things, 

*  so  they  do  in  the  office  of  the  altar ;  where  they 

*  tell  you  this  lie,  that  they  do  make  the  body  of 
'  Christ,  and  give  it  you  for  the  salvation  of  your 
'  souls.  They  lie  notoriously.  For  the  body  of 
'  Christ  was  only  once  made  by  himself  at  the  sup- 
'  per  before  his  passion  ;  and  was  once  only,  viz.  at 
'  that  time,  given  to  his  disciples.  Since  that  time 
'  it  was  never  made  by  any  one,  nor  given  to  any 

*  one." ' 

As  the  people  of  this  way  were  from  Peter  Bruis 
commonly  called  Petrobrusians  ;  so  they  were,  from 
Henry,  sometimes  called  Henricians. 

CHAP.  VIII. 

Of  tie  present  state  of  the  Controversy.  That  all  the 
National  Churches  in  the  World  are  Pcedobainists.  Of 
the  Antipctdohaptists  that  are  in  Germany,  Holland, 
England,  Poland,  and  Transylvania. 
§.  I.  ALL  the  opinions  that  had  any  great  num- 
ber of  abettors  in  the  ancient  times,  though  they 

u  Ad  Tolosanos,  Epist.  241.  [apud  Bernardi  Op.  torn.  ii. 
p.  276.  edit.  1586.] 

X  Ad  Artie.  4tum.  [apud  Bibl.  Patr.  ut  supra,  p.  228.  A.] 


All  National  Clmrches  are  Pcedobaptists.  279 

may  have  been  condemned  by  general  councils,  yet  chap. 

f        1  ^  -i  VIII. 

have  so   continued  or  sprung  uj)  afresh,   that  they 


have  in  some  country  or  other  become  the  general  jy^g'''' 


le  apo- 


opinion.     So  Nestorianism,  Eutychianism,  &c.,  have^*^^^- 
each  of  them  found  some  place,  in  which  to  this  day 
they  do  prevail  as  the  national  constitution. 

As  for  antipcedobaptism,  whatever  be  judged  of 
the  proofs  brought  to  shew  that  there  have  been 
some  societies  of  men  that  have  owned  it,  as  the  Pe- 
trobrusians  lately  mentioned,  &c.,  there  is  no  pre- 
tence that  it  has  been,  or  is  now,  the  opinion  of  any 
national  church  in  the  world.  Wherever  there  are 
at  present  any  Christians  of  that  persuasion,  they 
are  as  dissenters  from  the  general  body  of  Christians 
in  that  place.  If  this  admit  of  any  exception,  it  is 
in  the  country  of  Georgia,  or  Circassia  :  of  which  I 
shall  speak  presently. 

This,  for  all  Europe,  is  notorious.  The  papists 
do  not  only  own  infant-baptism,  but  do  generally 
still  hold  that  an  infant  dying  unbaptized,  though 
by  misadventure,  cannot  come  to  the  kingdom  of 
heaven  ;  but  must  go  to  the  region  of  Hades,  called 
limbiis  infantum.  And  they  have  scarce  any  anti- 
psedobaptists  mixed  among  them  in  the  countries 
where  they  have  the  government. 

In  many  of  the  protestant  or  reformed  countries 
there  are  some  of  this  persuasion ;  in  some  more, 
in  some  fewer,  and  in  some  none  at  all :  but  in 
none  of  them  has  it  prevailed  to  be  the  established 
religion.  And  though  the  contrary  be  not  at  all 
pretended,  yet  Mr.  Walker  has  taken  pains  to  prove 
this  by  reciting  y  their  several  confessions,  wherein 

y  Modest  Plea,  ch.  xxvii.  [sect.  5  and  6. p.  226 — 228.] 


280  All  National  Churches  are  Pcpdohaptists. 

CHAP,   they  own  infant-baptism  ;  and  among  the  rest,  that 
1_  of  the  Waldenses  or  Vaudois  assembled  at  Anffrosfne. 


1435- 


Ihel^o^""       The   church   of  England   is  taken   notice    of   by 
^*^^^'  Toc  some    to    speak   very  moderately   in   this   matter^: 
'  The  baptism  of  young  children  is  in  any  wise  to  be 

*  retained  in  the  church,  as  most  asfreeable  with  the 

*  institution  of  Christ.'  Yet  they  own,  as  I  shewed 
before  %  the  '  necessity  of  this  sacrament  where  it 
'  may  be  had.'  And  they  do  not  think  fit  to  use  the 
office  of  burial  (in  which  the  deceased  is  styled  a 
brother)  for  infants  that  die  without  it. 

The  Greek  Christians  also  of  Constantinople,  and 
other  parts  of  Europe  under  the  Turk's  dominion, 
are  known  to  bajjtize  infants.  Sir  Paul  Ricaut, 
among  others,  has  given  a  full  account''  of  their 
manner  of  doing  it;  and  wherein  they  differ  from 
the  ceremonies  of  the  Latins. 

The  same  may  be  said  of  the  Muscovites ;  who 
were  from  their  first  conversion  a  part  of  the  Greek 
church,  but  do  of  late  choose  a  patriarch  of  their 
own.  Of  their  practice  in  this  matter  for  the  last 
centuries,  Mr.  Walker  has  recited  evidences  in  the 
chapter  aforesaid ;  and  for  their  present  practice 
every  one  knows  it.  They  are  said  formerly  to  have 
baptized  none  before  the  fortieth  day,  except  in 
case  of  necessity ;  but  Dr.  Crull,  who  has  wrote 
latest  of  them,  says'^,  that  now  '  they  baptize  their 

*  children  as  soon  as  they  are  born.' 
II.  In  all  the  countries  of  Asia,  the  government  is 

either  Mahometan  or  Pagan.    Yet  in  many  of  them, 

z  Article  XXVII.  a  Ch.  vi.  §.8. 

^  Present  State  of  the  Greek  and  Armenian  Churches,  ch.  vii. 
[p.  i6i.  8o.  London,  1679.] 

^  Present  State  of  Muscovy,  vol.  i.  cap.  11.  [p.  192.] 


Of  the  Armenians.  281 

and  especially  of  those  under  the  Turks,  the  o^reatest  chap. 

...  VIII 

part  of  the  people  are  still  Christian :  there  are  also 


'i'ear  after 


many  Christians  in  several  of  the  countries  that  are^j^^**^"^ 
under  the  Persian  government;  and  some  in  those ^^'^^ 
of  the  Moocul.  These  have  all  continued  now  a  lono^ 
time  under  persecution  and  daily  hardships,  and  in 
great  wants  of  the  means  of  instruction ;  yet  have 
kept  most  of  the  main  articles  of  the  Christian  reli- 
gion. They  are  some  of  them  Nestorians,  as  those 
who  acknowledge  the  patriarch  of  Mosul ;  some 
Eutychians,  as  the  Jacobites,  the  Maronites,  (and 
the  Armenians,  as  most  say  ;  but  sir  Paul  Ricaut 
judges  otherwise  of  them).  An  account  of  their 
several  tenets  is  given  by  Brerewood,  in  his  Inquiries, 
Heylyn  in  his  Cosmography,  &c.  They  do  all  hold 
and  practise  infant-baptism. 

Col.  Danvers  says  '^',  that  '  the  Armenians  are 
'  confessed  by  Heylyn,  jNlicrocosm,  p.  573,  to  defer 
*  baptism  of  children  till  they  be  of  grown  years.' 
Heylyn  in  his  youth  wrote  a  short  tract  of  geography, 
called  ]\Iicrocosm  ^ :  and  afterward  living  to  a  more 
mature  age,  he  wrote  a  large  volume  on  the  same 
subject,  called  Cosmography ;  wherein  he  added  a 
great  many  particulars  concerning  each  nation,  that 
were  not  in  the  former  piece :  also  several  things  he 
altered  and  amended  upon  better  information ;  and 
he  left  out  such  things  as  he  had  not  found  to  be 

d  Treatise,  part  i.  ch.  7.  cent.  16.  [p  81.] 

'  [Dr.  Heylyn's  first  piece  came  out  under  the  title  of  '  Micro- 
'  cosmus,  a  Little  Description  of  the  Great  World.'  This  appear- 
ed first  in  162 1,  again  in  1624.  Third  edition,  in  which  he 
acknowledges  the  errors  and  defects  of  the  former  two,  in  1627. 

In  1665  the  enlarged  work  was  published,  entitled  '  Cosmo- 
'  graphy,  in  Four  Books,'  &c.  folio,  being  the  fourth  edition. 
The  fifth  in  167 S.] 


282  Armenians,  Maronites, 

CHAP,   confirmed.    Now  in  that  former  piece  he  had  divided 

_  Armenia  into  three  parts  :  1.  that  which  is  properly 

thrapo?'  so   called;    2.   Georgia;    3.  Mengrelia:    and  of  the 

sties.  Christians  of  Armenia  properly  so  called,  had  said, 

that  one  of  the  things  in  which  they  differ  from  the 

western   Christians   is,  'in   receiving  infants  to  the 

*  Lord's  table  presently  after  their  baptism.'  Which 
he  also  confirms  in  the  later  book^.  Of  the  Geor- 
gians, [Colchians,]  he  had  indeed  said  in  that  former 
piece,  that  *  they  baptize  not  their  children  till 
'  eight  years  old.'  But  in  the  later  and  larger  tract 
says  no  such  thing:  but,  on  the  contrary,  says, 
'  they  are  agreeable  in  doctrinal  points  to  the  church 
'  of  Greece,  whose  rituals  also  the  people  do  to  this 

*  day  follow :  not  subject  for  all  that  to  the  patri- 
'  arch  of  Constantinople,  (though  of  his  communion,) 
'  but  to  their  own  metropolitan  only^.' 

For  what  he  had  said  of  them  in  his  former  piece, 

*  that  they  baptize  not  till  the  eighth  year,'  he  had 
quoted  in  the  margin  Brerewood.  But  Brerewood, 
in  the  edition  that  I  have,  (London,  1622  •',)  does 
not  say  this  of  the  Georgians :  but  making  one 
chapter  (chap,  xvii.)  of  the  Georgians,  Circassians, 
and  Mengrelians  ;  (whom  he  makes  three  several 
people  all  bordering  together ;)  of  the  Georgians  says 
the  same  that  Heylyn  does  in  his  later  book,  viz.  that 
they  are  conformable  to  the  Greeks  :  but  says,  that 
'  the  Circassians  baptize  not  their  children  till  the 
'  eighth  year,  and  enter  not  into  the  church  (the 
'  gentlemen  especially)  till  the  sixtieth  (or  as  others 

*  say,  till  the  fortieth)  year,  but  hear  divine  service 

f  Lib.  iii.  in  Turcomania,  [p.  125.  edit.  1676.] 

g  [Ibid.  p.  130.] 

^  [It  is  exactly  the  same  in  the  earher  edition  of  16 14.] 


Jacobites,  Maronites.  283 


*  standing  without  tlie  temple ;  that  is   to  say,  till   <^^j|jP- 

*  through  age  they  grow  unable  to    continue  their 


'  rapines  and  robberies,  to  which  sin  that  nation  isthnpo-^'' 
'  exceedingly  addicted  :  so  dividing  their  life  betwixt '^^^'• 
'  sin  and  devotion,  dedicating  their  youth  to  rapine, 

*  and  their  old  age  to  repentance.' 

Concerning  these  Georgians  and  Mengrelians,  [or 
Circassians,]  I  shall  speak  more  particularly  pre- 
sently. But  for  the  Armenians;  both  Brerewood 
in  his  inquiries  S  and  Heylyn,  as  I  quoted  before, 
and  all  others,  do  agree  that  they  constantly  bap- 
tize infants.  And  if  the  reader  need  any  larger 
satisfaction,  he  may  have  it  from  sir  Paul  Ricaut, 
who  writes  distinctly  of  them,  not  from  remote  re- 
port, but  from  the  converse  he  had  with  them  :  for 
many  of  this  people  do  frequent  Smyrna,  Constan- 
tinople, &c.  He  gives'^  a  full  account  of  their  bap- 
tism of  infants  ;  and  that  '  they  esteem  it  necessary, 
'  as  being  that  which  washes  away  original  sin.' 
And  also,  that  (as  Heylyn  and  Brerewood  had  said) 

*  they   administer   to    the   child    after   it   the  holy 

*  eucharist,  which  they  do  only  by  rubbing  the  lips 
<  with  it.' 

The  Maronites  give  baptism  to  infants  with 
this  particularity',  that  they  baptize  not  a  male 
child  till  he  be  forty  days  old,  nor  a  female  till 
eighty  days :  which  is  the  time  limited,  Levit.  xii. 
for  the  purification  of  the  mother.  Also  they,  as 
well  as  the  Armenians,  give  the  eucharist  to  infants 
presently  after  their  baptism. 

Of  all  these  sorts  of  Christians  the  western  part 

i  Cap.  24.   [p.  173.  in  edit.  1614,  and  1622.] 

k  Present  State  of  the  Armenian  Church,  cap.  8.  [p.  432.] 

1  Heylyn,  Cosmograph.  Syria.      [Book  iii.  p.  40.  edit.  1676.] 


CHAP,   of  the  world  has  all  alonff  had  some  knowledo^e  and 
VIII.  *  =• 


284  Christians  of  St.  Thomas. 

of  the  world  has  all  along  had  some 
account :  but  it  is  otherwise  of  those  in  India,  called 
thrapo-^"^  the  Christians  of  St.  Thomas,  inhabiting  about 
sties.  Cochin,  Cranganor,  and  all  that  vast  tract  or  promon- 
tory, lying  between  the  coast  of  Malabar  and  the 
coast  of  Coromandel.  These  were  utterly  unknown, 
and  not  heard  of  by  us  of  the  West  for  a  thousand 
1400.  years  and  more,  viz.  till  about  the  year  1500,  when 
those  parts  were  discovered  by  the  Portuguese. 
There  were  then  estimated  to  be  fifteen  or  sixteen 
thousand  families  of  them,  livino-  amonsf  the  hea- 
thens,  to  whom  they  were  subject.  They  were 
found  in  the  practice  of  infant-baptism  ;  but  they 
did  not  administer  it  till  the  child  were  forty  days 
old,  except  in  the  case  of  danger  of  death.  An 
account  of  the  state  of  religion  in  which  they  were 
found,  and  of  this  among  the  rest,  is  given  by  Iliero- 
nymus  Osorius  'de  rebus  gestis  Emanuelis'^.'  And 
1500.  of  the  methods  by  which  they  were,  one  hundred 
years  after,  brought  over  to  a  communion  with  the 
church  of  Rome,  by  Mr.  Geddes",  in  his  Account  of 
the  Synod  of  Diamper.  The  practice  of  these  In- 
dian Christians  may  convince  our  antipaedobaptists 
of  their  mistake  in  thinking  that  infant-baj3tism 
began  in  the  known  parts  of  the  world  but  of  late 
years :  for  how  then  should  it  have  been  communi- 
cated to  these  men,  who  had  never  heard  of  such  a 
part  of  the  world  as  Europe  ? 

In  short,  there  can  be  no  question  made  of  the 

in  Lib.  iii.  prope  finem.  [H.  Osorii  de  rebus  gestis  Emanuelis 
regis  Lusitanise,  libri  sex.  8°.  Colon.  1574.  iterum  1576.] 

n  See  '  The  History  of  the  Church  of  Malabar :  together  with 
'the  Synod  of  Diamper,  celebrated  A.  D.  1599:  by  Michael 
'  Geddes.'  8vo.  London,  1694.] 


The  Georgians  and  MengreUans.  285 

practice  of  any  Christians  in  Asia  as  to  this  matter;  chap. 

.  .         VIII 

unless  it  be  of  those  I  mentioned  before,  that  inhabit 

tlie    countries    of  Georgia  and   Mengrelia   [or  Cir-J^^J^^p^^^^^'" 
cassia].     And  therefore  I  will  be  a  little  more  parti- ^^les. 
cular  about  them. 

Georgia  was  formerly  called  Iberia,  and  Men- 
grelia  [or  Circassia]  was  called  Colchis.  They 
bordered  together,  lying  in  the  remote  part  of  Asia, 
between  the  Euxine  and  Caspian  sea;  and  are  in 
reliofion  much  the  same. 

It  is  to  be  noted  that  these  people  were  converted 
to  the  Christian  faith  in  the  time  of  Constantine,  230- 
by  the  means  of  a  Christian  servant  maid  ;  much 
after  the  same  manner  as  Naaman  the  Syrian  was 
to  the  knowledge  of  God.  The  maid  by  prayer  to 
Christ  cured  the  queen  of  Iberia  of  a  sickness :  this 
and  some  other  evidences  converted  the  king  ;  and 
he  sent  messengers  to  Constantine  to  desire  some 
preachers  to  be  sent  to  instruct  the  people,  which 
was  readily  granted  :  and  the  nation  became  Christ- 
ian. This  is  related  by  authors  that  lived  about 
that  time,  such  as  Rufinus*^,  Socrates p,  &c. 

And  as  they  received  the  faith  from  that  church  300. 
under  Constantine,  so  they  are  recorded  in  the  suc- 
ceedinor  times  to  have  held  communion  with  the  340. 
same,  viz.  the  Greek  church.  And  how  that  church 
(as  well  before  their  division  from  the  Latins,  as 
since)  managed  in  the  matter  of  baptism,  has  been 
already  shewn.  In  after-times  the  Saracens,  and 
then  the  Turks,  possessing  those  parts  of  Asia  that 
lie  between  the  Greeks  and  them,  must  needs  break 
off  the  correspondence  in  great  measure :  and  they 

o  Hist.  Eccles.  lib.  x.  cap.  11.  p  Ibid.  lib.  i.  cap.  20. 


286  The  Georgians  and  Mengrelians. 

CHAP,  themselves,  as  well  as  the  Greeks,  have  been  since 

VIII 

L_  conquered  by  the  Mahometans.     Yet  they  have  and 


riie^a  o*^*''  ^^  ^^^^^  keep  up  some  face  of  Christianity,  thoug-h 
sties.  i]^  great  ignorance.  And  the  generality  of  late 
historians  and  geographers  do  still  speak  of  them  as 
conformable  to  the  Greek  church,  so  far  as  they 
practise  any  Christian  worship  at  all :  as  I  shewed 
even  now  that  Heylyn  in  his  last  book  does. 

But  sir  Paul  Ricaut,  who  was  consul  at  Smyrna, 
and  travelled  in  some  other  parts  of  the  Levant 
IS77- about  the  year  1677,  heard  the  same  report  of  them 
that  Brerewood  and  Heylyn  at  first  heard ;  Heylyn 
of  the  Georgians,  and  Brerewood  (as  he  distinguishes 
them)  of  the  Circassians.  Sir  Paul  Ricaut's  words 
are  these  ^ : 

'  The  Georgians,  which  in  some  manner  depend 
'  on  the  Greek  church,  baptize  not  their  children 
'  until  they  be  eight  years  of  age.  They  formerly 
'  did  not  admit  them  to  baptism  until  fourteen  :  but 
'  by  means  of  such  preachers  as  the  patriarch  of 
'  Antioch  sends  amongst  them  yearly,  they  were 
'  taught  how  necessary  it  was  to  baptize  infants ; 
'  and  how  agreeable  it  was  to  the  practice  of  the 
'  ancient  church.  But  these  being  a  peojile  very 
'  tenacious  of  the  doctrines  they  once  received,  could 
'  hardly  be  persuaded  out  of  this  error :  till  at 
'  length,  being  wearied  with  the  importunate  argu- 
'  ments  of  the  Greeks,  they  consented  as  it  were  to 
'  a  middle  way,  and  so  came  down  from  fourteen  to 
'  eight  years  of  age ;  and  cannot  as  yet  be  persuaded 
*  to  a  nearer  compliance.' 

When  I  read  this  first,  I  thought  that  we  had  at 

'1  Present  State  of  Greek  Church,  cap.  7.  [page  169.] 


The  Decay  of  Christianity  there.  287 

last  found  a  church  of  antipsedobaptists  (though  a   chap. 


VIII. 


great  way  off),  and  that  a  national  one,  as  far  as  it 
may  be  so  called  in  a  nation  mostly  Christians,  ^j^^^^  ^j^®^' 
though  under  Mahometan  government.  For  the^ti''*- 
words,  as  they  are  placed,  do  intimate  that  this 
people  keep  off  children  from  baptism  by  their 
principle;  and  that,  as  is  rej)resented,  of  a  long 
standing. 

But  as  sir  Paul  Ricaut  could  have  this  only  by 
report,  and  that  from  a  country  very  remote  from 
the  places  where  he  travelled,  and  very  unfrequented  : 
so  it  happened  that  sir  John  Chardin  was  actually'' 
travelling  in  those  countries  of  Georgia  and  Men- 
grelia  about  the  same  time :  and  also  was  acquainted 
there  with  a  missionary,  called  F.  Joseph  Maria  1577. 
Zampi,  w^ho  had  lived  there  twenty-three  years,  who 
shewed  him  a  manuscript  account  drawn  up  by 
himself,  of  the  observations  he  had  made  concerning 
the  religion  of  the  Mengrelians  and  Georgians ; 
which  account,  sir  John  says,  was  perfectly  agree- 
able to  all  that  he  himself  observed  there. 

Now  sir  John,  and  the  said  missionary  both,  do 
observe,  that  these  people  do  indeed  many  of  them 
put  off  the  baptizing  of  their  children  for  a  great 
while :  and  that  many  of  the  people  there  are  never 
baptized  at  all.  But  they  speak  of  this,  not  as  a 
principle  or  tenet  of  theirs,  that  so  it  ought  to  be 
done  :  but  as  proceeding  from  a  wretched  neglect 

r  Voyage  into  Persia,  p.  86.  [See  Travels  of  Sir  John  Chardin 
into  Persia  and  the  East-Indies,  through  the  Black  Sea  and  the 
country  of  Colchis,  folio,  London,  1689,  p.  77,  &:c.  Dr.  Wall 
appears  to  have  used  some  other  edition  ;  and  his  quotations, 
though  the  same  in  sense,  are  not  given  in  the  exact  words 
found  in  that  above  mentioned.]] 


288  The  Decay  of  Christianity  there. 

CHAP    ^^^   stupid   carelessness,  which   they  shew  in   that 
^^^^-     and   in   all  other   points   of  the  Christian   religion. 


Year  after  Christianity    is    there,    as    it    seems,    almost    extin- 
sties.  guished  :  and  whoever  reads  the  book,  sees  the  most 

deplorable  face   of  a  church  that  is  in  the  world. 

It  may  be  necessary  to  recite  some  passages  of  the 

book,  and  of  the  manuscript  there  exhibited. 

Sir  John  Chardin   himself  says%   *  Their  religion 

'  was,  I  believe,  formerly  the  same  with  that  of  the 

*  Greeks.'  But  for  the  present  state  of  it,  says ; 
'  I  could  never  discover  any  religion  in  any  Men- 

•  grelian ;  having  not  found  any  that  know  what 
'  religion,  or  law,  or  sin,  or  a  sacrament,  or  divine 
'  service  is.' 

The  MS.  says*,  '  This  people  have  not  the  least 
'  idea  of  faith  or  religion.  The  most  of  them  take 
'  eternal  life,  the  universal  judgment,  the  resurrec- 
'  tion  of  the  dead,  for  fables,'  And  a  little  after", 
'  God  only  knows  the  deplorable  estate  of  these 
'  wretched  priests,  or  the  validity  of  their  priest- 
'  hood.  For  it  is  always  uncertain  whether  they 
'  are  baptized ;  and  whether  the  bishops  that  have 
'  ordained  them,  have  been  consecrated  or  baptized 
'  themselves.' 

And  of  their  baptism,  gives  this  accounf^ : 
*  They  anoint  infants  as  soon  as  they  are  born, 
'  on  the  forehead.  The  oil  for  this  anointing  is 
'  called  myrone.  The  baptism  is  not  administered 
'  till  a  long  time  after.  No  man  baptizes  his  child 
'  till  he  has  means  [or  unless  he  have  ability,  s'il 
'  ifCa  moyeti]   to   make  a  feast   at   the    christening. 

s  Page  85.  [93.  edit.  1686.]  '  Page  86.  [94.] 

"  Page  89.  [97.]  "  Page  93.  [loi.] 


The,  Decay  of  Cliristianity  there.  289 

Hence  it  comes    to    pass    that  manv  infants  die  chap. 

.,,,...,  "  VIII. 

without  receiving'  it.  


*  When  they  administer  it  to  any  infant,  tliey  do ^j''"^'"  ^*'^^'" 

*  not  carry  it  to  the  church  :  but  in  a  common  roomst'es. 
'  the  priest,  without  putting  on  any  priestly  habit, 

'  sits  him  doM^n,  and  reads  a  long  time  in  a  book. 

*  After  a  long  reading,  the  godfather  undresses  the 
'  infant,  and  washes  him  all  over  with  water  :  and 
'  then  rubs  him  over  with  the  im/rone  which  the 
'  priest  gives  him.  This  done,  they  clothe  the 
'  infant  again,  and  give  him  something  to  eat,'  &c. 

'  There  is  not  one  priest  among  them  that  under- 

*  stands  the  form  of  baptism :  so  that  there  is  no 
'  question  but  their  baptism  is  utterly  invalid.  On 
'  this  regard  the  fathers  Theatins  baptize  as  many 
'  infants  as  they  can.  They  give  them  baptism  under 
<  pretence  of  applying  some  medicine  to  them,'  &c- 

Sir  John  himself,  at  another  place  in  his  book, 
tells  how  the  Romish  jiriests  that  are  there,  do  this. 
A  priest  that  is  called  to  see  a  sick  child,  calls  for  a 
bason  of  water,  as  it  were  to  wash  his  hands :  then 
before  his  hands  be  dry,  he  touches  the  forehead 
of  the  child  with  a  wet  finger,  as  if  he  observed 
something  concerning  his  distemper:  or  by  shaking 
his  hand  causes  some  drops  of  water  to  fly  in  the 
face  of  a  child  that  stands  by,  as  it  were  in  sport ; 
saying  the  form  of  baptism  either  mentally,  or 
with  a  muttering  voice.  One  Avould  think  this  as 
defective  a  sort  of  baptizing  as  that  of  the  ignorant 
native  priests. 

Sir  John  was  invited  to  two  christenings  there. 
He  went,  that  he  might  see  the  fashion  of  it.  He 
gives  an   account  of  one  of   them^.     It  was  much 

>    Page  140.  [p.  154.] 

WALF.,  vol..  II.  U 


290  Georgians.    Mmgrelians. 

CHAP,  after  the  manner  related  in  the  manuscript.     The 

priest  read,  but  talked  at  the  same  time  to  those 

Year  after  ^\^^^  came  iu  and  out.    The  people  went  irreverently 

the  apo-  '        '  •' 

sties.  to  and  fro  in  the  room  ;  and  so  did  the  boy  that  was 
to  be  baptized,  chewing  a  piece  of  pig  the  while. 
'  He  was,'  he  says,  '  a  little  boy  of  five  years  old.' 

Tt  is  to  be  noted  that  the  manuscript  gives 
this  as  the  common  account  of  the  rites  both  of 
the  Mengrelians  and  Georgians.  And  so  sir  John 
himself,  when  he  conies  to  the  Georgians,  has  only 
this  of  their  religion.  '  The  belief  of  the  Georgians 
'  is  much  the  same  with  that  of  the  Mengrelians. 
'  The  one  and  the  other  received  it  at  the  same 
'  time ;  viz.  in  the  fourth  century :  and  by  the 
'  same  means,  of  a  woman  of  Iberia  that  had  been 
'  a  Christian  at  Constantinople.  In  a  word,  the 
'  one  as  well  as  the  other  have  lost  all  the  spirit  of 
*  Christianity :  and  what  I  said  of  the  Mengrelians 
'  (that  they  have  nothing  of  Christianity  but  the 
'  name,  and  that  they  neither  observe  nor  hardly 
'  know  any  precept  of  the  law  of  Jesus  Christ)  is 
'  no  less  true  of  the  people  of  Georgia''^' 

This  state  of  the  matter,  as  it  is  different  from 
what  sir  Paul  Ricaut  gives,  (for  this  people  do  bap- 
tize infants  when  they  think  of  it,  and  when  tliey 
have  got  their  good  cheer  ready,)  so  it  might  give 
occasion  to  the  report  which  he,  and  Heylyn  for- 
merly, had  heard.  For  it  is  probable  the  patriarch 
of  Antioch  might  send  to  them  to  be  more  diligent 
in  baptizing  their  infants.  But  the  arguments  that 
this  people  needed  to  persuade  them  to  it,  were  not 
such  as  are  used  to  antipsedobaptists,  but  such  as 

2  Page  206.  [p.  192.] 


we  should  use  to  Christians  that  are  falling  back  ^^^j^' 


Cophti.    Ahassens.  291 

0  Christians  that 
into  heathenism,  or  total  irreligion 

III,  In  Africa  there  are  but  two  sorts  of  Christians:  the  ajo/ 
the  Cophti  of  ^Egypt,  who  are  the  remains  of  the  ohP''*^'" 
Christian  church  there ;  and  the  Abassens.  Both  of 
these  baptize  their  infants,  as  is  clear  by  accounts 
given  of  them  by  all  historians  and  travellers. 
Brerewood%  lieylyn  ^,  and  others,  speak  of  their 
particular  observations  about  it.  The  Cophti  bap- 
tize none  till  he  be  forty  days  old,  though  he  die  in 
the  interim.  The  Abassens  (as  we  said  before  of 
the  Maronites  in  Asia)  baptize  the  male  children 
at  forty  days,  and  the  female  at  eighty  days,  after 
their  circumcision  ;  for  they  circumcise  their  children 
of  both  sexes.  But  these  last  do  in  the  case  of 
peril  of  death  baptize  sooner.  They  do  both  give 
the  eucharist  to  infants  after  baptism. 

But  here  also  a  mistake  in  a  late  book  of  travels 
needs  to  be  rectified.  Mr.  Thevenot  tells  in  his 
account  of  i^gypt*^,  that  while  he  was  at  Grand 
Cairo,  he  had  some  conference  with  an  ambassador 
that  was  there  from  the  Abassens'  country,  about 
the  religion  and  other  affairs  of  those  parts.  This 
ambassador  told  him,  that  the  Abassens  circumcise 
their  children  '  at  eight  days  old,  as  the  Jews ;  and 
'  fifteen  days  after,  baptize  them.  Before  that  the 
*  Jesuits  came  thither,  they  did  not  baptize  them  till 
'  thirty  or  forty  years^ 

Whoever  reads  what  all  other  historians  say  of  this 
people,  viz.  that  they  baptized  forty  days  after  cir- 
cumcision, will  easily  observe  that  jMonsieur  Thevenot 

a  Inquiries,  ch.  22,  23. 

1>  Cosmographia,  yEgypt,  and  Ethiopia  Superior, 
f  Travels,  torn.  i.  part  2.  ch. 69.  [p.  238.  edit.  fol.  London,  1687.] 

U  2 


292  Cophti.    Ahassens. 

CHAP,  has  here  mistaken  in  the  last  word  of  the  sentence, 

years  for  clays.     Either  he  misheard  the  ambassador, 

\  ear  after         |     mjstook  in  Setting"  it  down  :  or  else  the  French 

the  apo-  o 

sties.  printer  mistook  it,  for  it  is  so  in  the  French  ^,  as  well 
as  in  the  translation  of  the  book  into  English.  There 
are  a  great  many  of  those  eastern  Christians  that  pnt 
off  the  baptism  forty  dai/s :  but  if  any  had  delayed 
baptism  till  forty ^ears,  (to  which  age  half  of  mankind 
does  never  arrive,)  w^e  should  have  heard  more  of  it 
than  from  that  hour's  conference. 

IV.  This  is  the  account  of  the  practice  of  the 
national  churches.  But  though  there  be  no  national 
church  but  what  baptizes  infants  ;  yet  there  are,  and 
have  been  for  about  one  hundred  and  eighty  years 
last  past,  in  several  countries  of  Europe,  considerable 
numbers  of  men,  that  differ  from  the  established 
churches  in  this  point.  The  history  of  their  begin- 
ning and  progress  in  Germany  is  so  well  known,  and 
so  much  talked  of,  that  I  shall  say  the  less  of  it.  It 
is  in  short  this  : 

No  sooner  had  the  reformation  begun  by  Luther, 
1417- anno  1517,  taken  good  footing  in  Saxony,  and  some 
other  parts  of  Germany,  great  numbers  of  people 
and  some  princes  (who  were  at  this  time  generally 
weary  of  the  abuses  and  corruptions  of  popery,  and 
longed  for  a  reformation)  greedily  embracing  it,  but 
1422.  that  within  five  or  six  years  there  arose  a  sort  of  men 
that  pretended  to  refine  upon  him.  One  Nicolas 
Storck,  and  Thomas  Munzer,  seconded  within  a 
while  by  one  Baltazar  Hobmeier,  preached  that  the 
baptism  of  infants  was  also  an  abuse  that  must 
be  reformed ;  and  they  baptized  over  again  such  as 

d  [Printed  in  four  volumes  folio,  at  Paris,  1683.] 


Antipctdohaptism  in  Germany,  anno  1522.  293 

became  their  disciples.    They  added  also  other  things ;  chap. 
that  it  was  not  fit,  nor  to  be  endured  in  the  kino-.      ^"'' 


dom  of  Jesus  Christ,  that  some   should  be  so  rich  Y^-'^'-^fter 

the  apo- 

and  others  so  poor;  or  that  the  boors  should  be  heldsties. 
to  such  burdensome  services  by  their  landlords. 
Abundance  of  people  flocked  to  them.  And  the 
more,  for  that  there  had  been  before  discontents, 
and  some  insurrections,  and  of  those  poorer  sort  of 
people,  because  of  their  foresaid  hardships. 

There  was  this  difference  between  Luther's  me- 
thod and  theirs ;  that  he  and  his  partners  preached 
up  obedience  to  all  lawful  magistrates  in  temporal 
things ;  but  they  carried  things  with  a  higher  hand, 
in  defiance  of  magistracy  ;  and  JMunzer  called  him- 
self The  sivord  of  the  Lord,  and  of  Gideon^. 

Luther  and  the  protestants  entered  their  protesta-  1425. 
tion  against  their  proceedings,  as  bringing  a  scandal 
on  the  new-begun  reformation  ;  but  they  went  on, 
and  after  some  time  (great  numbers  of  disorderly 
people  joining  with  them)  became  masterless,  made 
a  sort  of  army,  committed  great  ravages  on  the 
estates  of  rich  men,  where  they  marched.  And  at 
last,  anno  1534,  a  strong  party  of  this  sort  of  men  1434. 
coming  mostly  from  Holland,  seized  on  the  city  of 
JMunster,  where  one  John  Becold,  called  John  of 
Leyden,  being  advanced  to  be  their  king,  they  pre- 
tended to  prophecy  and  revelation  ;  and  did  under 
the  name  of  Christ's  kingdom  practise  several  tyran- 
nies and  enormities,  as  polygamy,  plundering,  &c. 

Some  regular  forces  being  brought  against  them, 
they  were  subdued  :  and  the  king  and  some  of  the 
heads  of  them  being  put  to  death,  the  rest  were  dis- 
persed into  several  parts  of  Germany  ;  and  a  great 

f  Judges  vii.  18. 


294         Antipc^dohaptism  in  Germany^  anno  1522. 

many  of  them  fled   into  the  Low  Countries 
there  were  already  great  numbers  of  them. 


the^apo-^'^  The  anti]i8cdobaptists,  that  are  now,  do  not  love 
sties.  ^Q  \\e2LV  of  these  men,  nor  do  own  them  as  predeces- 
sors ;  neither  is  there  any  reason  that  their  miscaF- 
riages  should  be  imputed  to  them,  provided  that 
they  renounce  and  keep  themselves  from  all  such 
seditious  practices  :  especially  since  many  of  the 
people  professing  that  opinion  did  a  little  after  sepa- 
rate themselves  from  the  tumultuous  rabble,  and 
made  a  declaration  of  better  principles  under  better 
leaders,  as  I  shall  shew  by  and  by.  Almost  all 
alterations  in  religion,  either  for  better  or  worse, 
have  at  the  beginning  some  disorders.  It  is  happy 
where  magistrates,  pastors,  and  people,  do  all  at 
one  time  agree  and  conspire  in  any  reformation  that 
is  thought  necessary:  but  it  is  seldom  known. 

That  which  is  more  material  to  the  history  of 
infant-baptism,  is  to  inquire  whether  this  Storck, 
INIunzer,  Hobmeier,  &c.,  did  at  that  time,  viz.  anno 

H22.  ]522,  set  up  this  tenet  as  a  thing  then  new  or  newly 
revived ;  or  whether  it  had  been  continued  and 
handed  down  by  some   dispersed  people,   from   the 

«o5o.  times  of  the  Petrobrusians  (of  whom  I  spoke  in  the 
last  chapter,  §.  5.)  to  this  time.  Danvers  says  *",  that. 
'  the  present  Belgic  anabaptists  do  with  one  mouth 
'  assert  and  maintain  the  latter.'  The  chief  reason  he 
brings  either  of  his  own  or  of  theirs  is,  because  it 
appears  that  there  were  great  numbers  of  them  in 
several  parts  of  Germany  in  Luther's  time  ;  and  that 
he  and  others  of  the  first  protestants  had  disputations 

1422.  with   them  in   Saxony,  Thuringia,  Switzerland,  &c., 

1429.  *  whereby   it  is   evident  that   they  had   a  being    in 

f  Treatise,  part  ii.  chap.  7.  pag.  257.  edit.  2.  1674. 


Year  after 


apo- 


Tke  Pyghards  of  Bohemia.  295 

'those   parts   before   Luther's  time;    for   it    cannot  chap. 
'  rationally  be  supposed   that   they  should   all   of  a 
'  sudden  be  spread  over  so  great  a  territory  as  thej^jp 
'  Up]3er  Germany.'  sties 

But  of  the  sudden  increase  both  of  the  protestants 
and  of  these  men,  I  gave  some  account  before.  He 
brings  also  some  authorities.  But  they  are  out  of 
books  of  no  credit  for  any  thing  before  their  own 
time  :  Dutch  Martyrology,  Frank,  Twisk,  Merning, 
&c.  If  there  were  any  continuation  of  the  doctrine 
for  the  said  two  or  three  hundred  years,  it  must 
have  been  very  obscure,  and  by  a  very  few  men,  be- 
cause there  is  in  all  that  interval  no  mention  of  them 
in    any   good  author.     The    only    authority    that  I 

remember  to  have  read  after  126*0,  and  before  1522,"^°' 

'  1422. 

which  may  seem  to  make  any  thing  to  the  purpose 
of  antipcTedobaptism,  is  a  letter  written  to  Eras- 
mus out  of  Bohemia  by  one  Joannes  Slechta  Coste- 
lecius,  dated  October  10th,  1519  ;  a  part  whereof  is  1419. 
published  by  Colomesius  in  his  Collection  of  Letters 
of  Men  of  Note,  Epistle  30  §.  This  letter,  as  it  is 
dated  three  years  before  Storck  and  the  rest  are 
said  to  have  begun,  so  it  speaks  of  a  sect  that  had 
been  then  in  being  in  tliat  country  for  some  time. 
I  will  recite  that  part  of  the  letter  entire,  because, 
though  it  be  not  all  to  this  purpose,  yet  it  is  all 
worth  the  reading,  that  we  may  see  what  schemes 
of  doctrine  were  abroad  in  the  world  a  little  before 
Luther  began  to  oppose  the  church  of  Rome. 

'  The  third  sect  is  of  those  whom  they  call 
'  Pyghards  :  they  have  their  name  from  a  certain 
'  refugee  of  the  same  nation,  who  came  hither  ninety- 

•^  [This  Collection  is  subjoined  to  an  edition  of  Clemens  Roma- 
iiiis,  puljlished  by  Colomesius,  12",  London,  1687.] 


296 


The  Fycfliards  of  Bohemia. 


seven  years  ago,  when  that  wicked  and  sacrilegious 
John  Zizka  declared  a  defiance  of  the  churchmen 
and  all  the  clergy.'     (This  was  1420.) 

'  These  men  have  no  other  opinion  of  the  pope, 
cardinals,  bishops,  and  other  clergy,  than  as  of 
manifest  Antichrists  :  they  call  the  pope  sometimes 
the  beast^  and  sometimes  the  whore,  mentioned  in 
the  Revelations.  Their  own  bishops  and  priests 
they  themselves  do  choose  for  themselves,  ignorant 
and  unlearned  laymen  that  have  wives  and  chil- 
dren. They  mutually  salute  one  another  by  the 
name  of  brother  and  sister. 

'  They  own  no  other  authority  than  the  Scrip- 
tures of  the  Old  and  New  Testament.  They 
slight  all  the  doctors  both  ancient  and  modern, 
and  give  no  regard  to  their  doctrine. 

*  Their  priests,  when  they  celebrate  the  offices  of 
the  mass,  [or  communion,]  do  it  without  any 
priestly  garments  :  nor  do  they  use  any  prayer  or 
collects  on  this  occasion,  but  only  the  Lord's 
Prayer ;  by  which  they  consecrate  bread  that  has 
been  leavened. 

'  They  believe  or  own  little  or  nothing  of  the 
sacraments  of  the  church.  Such  as  come  over  to 
their  sect  must  every  one  be  baptized  anew  in  mere 
water.  They  make  no  blessing  of  salt  nor  of  the 
water  ;  nor  make  any  use  of  consecrated  oil. 

'  They  believe  nothing  of  divinity  in  the  sacra- 
ment of  the  Eucharist ;  only  that  the  consecrated 
bread  and  wine  do  by  some  occult  signs  represent 
the  death  of  Christ :  and  accordingly,  that  all 
that  do  kneel  down  to  it  or  worship  it,  are  guilty 
of  idolatry.  That  that  sacrament  was  instituted 
by  Christ  to  no   other  purpose  but  to  renew  the 


The  Pi/ghardB  of  Bohemia.  297 

'  memory    of   liis    passion,   and    not    to    be    carried  chap. 
'  about  or  held   up   by  the  priest  to  be  gazed  on. 


'  For  that  Christ  himself,  who  is  to  be  adored  and  Y^^""  ^^^^^' 

the  apo- 

'  worshipped    with    the    honour    of    latria,    sits    at^t'es. 
'  the   right   hand   of  God,   as  the  Christian   church 
'  confesses  in  the  Creed. 

'  Prayers  of  the  saints  and  for  the  dead  they 
'  count  a  vain  and  ridiculous  thing :  as  likewise  au- 
'  ricular  confession,  and  penance  enjoined  by  the 
'  priest  for  sins.  Eves  and  fast  days  are,  they  say, 
'  a  mockery,  and  the  disguise  of  hypocrites. 

'  They  say,  the  holydays  of  the  Virgin  Mary,  and 
'  the  apostles  and  other  saints,  are  the  invention  of 
'  idle  people.  But  yet  they  keep  the  Lord's  day, 
'  and  Christmas,  and  Easter,  and  Whitsuntide,'  &c. 
He  says  there  were  great  numbers  of  this  sect  then 
in  Bohemia.  '419- 

Where  it  is  here  said  that  they  rebaptized,  it  is 
not  certain  whether  they  did  it  as  judging  baptism 
in  infancy  invalid,  or  as  judging  all  baptism  re- 
ceived in  the  corrupt  way  of  the  church  of  Rome 
to  be  so.  The  coherence  of  the  words  seems  to 
incline  to  the  latter.  And  Ottius,  Hist.  Anabapt.^' 
anno  1521,  affirms  the  latter  to  be  true. 

There  is,  I  think,  no  doubt  but  these  Pyghards 
were  the  same  that  iEneas  Sylvius  gives  an  account 
of  in  his  Historia  Bohemica'  written  sixty  years 
before,  and  calls  Picards.  He  in  that  history  says 
nothing  of  their  denying  infants'  baptism,  as  I  ob- 

1^  [Jo.  H.  Ottii  Annales  Anabaptistici,  4to.  Basilere,  1672.] 
i  [This  piece  is   found  in   the   collections    entitled,  '  Historife 
'  BohemiccE  Scriptores,'  published   by   Dabravius,  by  Freherus, 
&c.    also    in    vol.    i.    of    the    '  Waldensia'    of    B.    Lydius,    1 30, 
1616.] 


298  The  Pyghards  of  Bohemia. 

CHAP,  served  in  the  last  chapter  §.  6.     Baltazar  Lydiiis\ 
and  Burigenus  do  both  of  them  recite  the  confes- 


Vear  after  gJQi^g  of  thcse  men,  oiFered  bv  themselves  to  kinsf 

the  apo-  •'  ° 

sties.  Uladislaus,  in  whicli  they  expressly  own  it.     John 

^'^°''Huss,  Mdiose  doctrine  these  men  followed,  is  never 

1315.  said  to  have  denied  it:  only  he  is  accused  to  have 

consented  to  that  opinion  of  Wickliffe',  that  a  child 

that  misses  of  baptism  may  possibly  be  saved. 

These  Pyghards  do  in  their  confessions  say,  that 
they  are  falsely  called  Waldenses.  I  am  apt  to 
think  they  had  this  name  of  Picards,  or  Pyghards, 
from  the  old  Beghards,  which  was  one  of  the  sects 
that  we  do  now  comprehend  under  the  name  Wal- 
denses, though  the  Waldenses,  so  called  by  Pilich- 
dorf,  did,  as  he  says™,  abominate  the  Beghards. 
One  of  the  authors  in  Gretzer's"  collection  of 
writers  against  the  Waldenses,  called  Conradus  de 
monte  puellarum,  says,  that  this  sect  was  then  rife 
in  all  Germany,  and  that  '  the  men  of  it  were  called 
'  Beghards,  and  the  women  Begines  :'  but  has  no- 
thing about  their  baptism.  And  I  have  beard  that 
there  are  now  popish  monasteries  in  Flanders  of 
men  called  Beghards,  and  women  Beguines.     I  know 

k  [See  the  collection  entitled,  '  Waldensia,  id  est  Conservatio 
'  ver*  Ecclesia3  demonstrata  ex  confessionibus,  cum  Taboritarum 
'  ante  CC.  fere  annos,  turn  Bohemorum,  circa  tem])ora  Refor- 
'  mationis  scriptis.  Studio  et  opera  Balthasaris  Lydii,  Eccle- 
'  siastiE  apud  Durdrechtanos.'  2.  torn.  12  \  Roterodami  et  Dor- 
draci,  1616  et  161 7.  In  the  first  volume  occurs  the  Confession 
alluded  to  in  the  text ;  and  likewise  a  Defence  of  it,  translated 
out  of  Bohemian  by  Burigenus,  Doctor  de  Kornis.  See  the 
second  part  of  that  volume,  page  i,  &c.  and  again,  p.  92,  &c.] 

1  Foxe  Martyrology,  John  Huss,  1415. 
I"  See  ch.  vii.  §.  7. 

"  [See  above,  chap.  vii.  p.  244.] 


The  Pi/ghards  of  Bohemia.  299 

not  what  signification  that  name  may  have  in  any  c hap. 

language,  that  can  make  it  ai)plicab]e  to  such  dif- 

ferent  constitutions  (for  the  old  Beghards  did,  as  all  Y'"^'"  ^^'^'^'^ 

^  °  _  the  apo- 

the  rest  whom  Me  call  Waldenses,  abominate  the  sties, 
church  of  Rome),  unless  it  signify  the  same  as  our 
English  word  beggar :  and  so  they  should  have 
their  name  from  their  poverty,  as  some  sorts  both 
of  the  friars  and  also  of  the  Waldenses  had.  The 
council  of  Vienna  under  Clement  V.  condemns  a 
sort  of  people  then  in  Germany,  the  men  called 
Beghards,  the  women  Begines,  as  holding  certain 
distracted  opinions  there  recited,  much  the  same  as 
the  wildest  of  our  Quakers  and  enthusiasts.  The 
council  says  nothing  of  their  denying  infant-bap- 
tism, but  yet  they  pass  a  decree  in  confirmation 
of  it. 

I  said  that  the  antipredobaptists,  dispersed  from 
jNIunster,  fled  some  into  several  principalities  of  the 
Upper  Germany,  and  some  into  the  Low  Countries. 
They  that  continued  in  Germany  found  but  cold 
entertainment ;  jjartly  because  of  their  new  doctrines, 
and  partly  because  of  the  disorders  they  had  com- 
mitted during  that  short  time  of  their  reign.  The 
papists  generally  reproached  the  protestants,  that 
they  were  a  sect  sprung  from  them,  and  would  call 
all  protestants,  in  scorn,  anabaptists  ;  but  the  pro- 
testants disowned  them,  and  wrote  against  them. 
And  Sleidan  gives  several  instances  wherein  the 
protestant  princes  and  states  declared  against  har- 
bouring them ;  and  made  answer  to  the  reproaches 
of  the  papists,  that  they  took  more  care  to  rid  their 
countries  of  them,  than  they  themselves  did.  And 
there  are  said  to  be  very  few  of  them  now  in  either 


300  Menno  of  Friezeland, 

CHAP,  the  popish  or  the  protestant  countries  of  the  Upper 

L_  Germany. 

tlrapt?^'  Those  of  them  that  retired  into  the  Belgic  pro- 
sties,  vinces,  found  there  more  partisans  than  any  where 
else.  At  Amsterdam  particularly  they  were  near 
acting  the  same  tragedy  they  had  done  at  Munster. 
One  John  Geles,  sent  out  of  Munster  by  John  of 
Leyden  to  get  supplies  of  men,  and  to  stir  up  other 
cities,  had  formed  a  design  to  surprise  Amsterdam, 
May  12th,  1535.  Which,  by  his  numbers  in  the 
town,  and  some  from  other  places,  he  was  like  to 
have  effected.  But  they  were  defeated  and  killed. 
Also  one  John  Matthew  set  up  for  a  chief,  and 
chose  to  himself  twelve  apostles  ;  and  found  a  great 
many  disciples  to  his  doctrine.  They  prophesied 
that  the  end  of  the  world  would  bo  within  a  year  : 
and  filled  people's  heads  with  many  other  enthusi- 
astical  notions.  Being  suppressed  by  the  magis- 
trates, and  some  of  them  put  to  death,  they  are  said 
to  have  endured  it  with  great  constancy. 
'■^•^  ■  Cassander  mentions  also**  one  John  Batenburg, 
who  after  the  ceasing  of  the  sedition  of  Munster 
began  another.  There  M-ere  several  other  disturb- 
ances of  less  monient,  which  I  pass  by. 

But  Cassander  and  all  agree,  that  a  little  while 
after  this,  one  Menno,  a  countryman  of  Friezeland, 
a  man  of  a  sober  and  quiet  temper,  that  held  the 
doctrine  of  antipsedobaptism,  did  disclaim  and  pro- 
test against  the  seditious  doctrines  and  practices  of 
those  at   Munster,  and  of  Batenburg :    and    taught 

o  Prgefat.  ad  Ducem  Clivise.  [prefixed  to  Cassander's  treatise 
'  Testimonia  de  Baptismo  Infantium,'  page  673  of  his  works, 
fol.  Paris,  i  616.] 


Theodoric^  ^c.  301 


that  the  kingdom  of  Jesus  Christ,  which  they  had   ^^^^^^ 
pretended  to  set  np  by  external  force,  consisted  in 


,  1  r¥>     •  •    J.1  'i?  Year  after 

patience,   meekness,   and  snftermg  quietly,  it   occa-theapo- 
sion  should  be.     That  one  Theodoric  succeeded  this'*^*"'- 
Menno  in  the  same  doctrine.     And  Cassander  says, 
that   in  his  time,  which  Avas  about  140  years  ago,  1460. 
'  almost  all  that   continued   the   profession   of  that 
'  opinion  in  the  Belgic  provinces,  were  followers  of 

*  this  Menno.'  And  so  to  this  day  they  generally 
call  themselves  Mennonists,  or,  by  abbreviation, 
Minnists. 

He  cives  them  this  character:  '  Most  of  them  do 
'  shew  signs  of  a  pious  disposition ;  and  it  seems  to 
'  be  rather  by  mistake,  than  by  any  wilful  wicked- 
'  ness,  that  they,  carried  by  an  unskilful  zeal,  have 
'  departed   from   the   true    sense    of  the   Scripture, 

*  and  the  uniform  agreement  of  the  whole  church.' 
And  says,  '  that  they  seem  worthy  rather  of  pity 
'  and  due  information,  than  of  persecution,  or  being 
'  undone.' 

One  thing  he  says  p  of  this  Menno,  that  is  par- 
cular,  viz.  '  That  whereas  the  credit  of  antiquity 
'  and  perpetual  tradition  carries  great  authority  with 
'  it,   even   with   those    that   set   up   new   doctrines,' 

&c. And  accordingly  '  some  of  these  men  had 

'  first  endeavoured  to  fix  the  origin  of  infant-bap- 
'  tism  upon  some  pope  of  Rome :  Menno  had  more 

*  sense  [or  was  more  wary,  pr?(devtior~\  than  so. 
'  He  was  forced  to  own  that  it  had  been  in  use  from 
'  the  apostles'   time.     But   he    said    that   the   false 

*  apostles  were  the  authors  of  it.' 

Cassander  does  there  confute  this  notion  with  so 

p  Prsefat.  ad  Testimonia  contra  Anabaptistas,  [being  a  second 
preface  to  the  beforenamed  treatise,  p.  675.  ibid.] 


302  The  present  State  of  the  Minnists. 

CHAP,  good  reasons,  that  I  wonder  be  should  call  it  a  more 
wary  one  than  the  other.    For  as  it  had  been  indeed 


Year  after  ^^^  unwarv  tliinof  in  Menno  to  deny  that  the  bap- 

tne  apo-  jo  j  i 

sties.  tizing  of  infants  was  in  use  in  the  ages  next  the 

apostles  ;  when  he  might,  for  ought  he  knew,  be 
convicted  of  falsehood  by  the  remaining  acts  and 
records  of  those  times :  so  to  maintain  that  all  the 
books  that  were  preserved  by  the  church,  were  such 
as  were  written  by  the  followers  of  the  false  apo- 
stles, and  none  by  the  followers  of  the  true,  is  an 
imagination  rather  more  absurd  than  the  other. 
There  were  false  apostles  indeed,  but  they  set 
themselves  to  slander,  and  speak,  and  write  against 
the  true  ones,  as  appears  by  what  St.  Paul  and 
St.  John  do  say  of  them.  But  the  books  and  writings 
which  the  church  has  preserved,  are  of  such  as  do 
own  the  authority  of  the  apostles. 
1599-  As  for  the  present  state  of  the  Minnists,  a  late 
writer  of  those  parts,  an  extract  of  whose  book  is 
given  by  Mr.  BovaH,  saySj  '  Except  Holland,  where 
'  they  live  peaceably,  they  are  almost  extinct.'  By 
Holland,  I  suppose  he  means  the  united  provinces. 

In  those  provinces  there  are  considerable  num- 
bers of  them,  especially  in  Holland  and  Friezeland. 
They  have  the  repute  of  being  very  fair  traders, 
and  very  sober  men.  They  use  a  plainness  in  their 
garb  to  some  degree  of  affectation,  as  the  Quakers 
in  England  do.  And  they  hold  opinions  something 
like  theirs,  against  the  lawfulness  of  oaths,  of 
war,  &c. 

The  other  tenets  attributed  to  them  are  ^ ;   That 

^  History  of  the  works  of  the  learned,  July  1699. 
•■  Stoup,  Religion  of  the  Hollanders.      [See  '  La  Religion  des 
'  HoUandois,'  i  2mo.  1673.  lettre  3.  p- 49,  50,51.] 


The  present  State  of  the  3Iinnists.  303 

there  is  no  oris'iiial  sin.     That  only  the  New  Testa-   chap. 

,  .  .  VIII. 

ment  is  a  rule  of  faith.     That  Christ  had  his  flesh, 


not  of  the  Virgin  Mary,  but  from  heaven.     That  it  ^j^g^'^p^J}^'" 
is  possible  to   live  without   sin   in  this  life.     That^*^^^- 
departed  souls  sleep  till  the  resurrection,  &c. 

But  some  that  have  lived  in  that  country  say, 
that  all  these  o])inions  are  not  common  to  them  all : 
but  that  some  churches  of  them  hold  some  of  these 
opinions,  and  other  churches  others  of  them.  For 
their  general  humour  is  to  divide  into  several 
churches  on  the  least  difference  of  opinions.  Those 
of  the  old  Flemish  way  keejD  a  very  strict  discipline, 
and  excommunicate  people  on  very  nice  occasions  : 
the  Friezelanders  receive  all.  Some  of  them  allow 
of  no  baptism  but  by  immersion,  or  putting  the 
baptized  person  into  the  water ;  but  the  most  part 
of  them  admit  of  baptism  by  affusion  of  water.  In 
short,  every  congregation  of  them  almost  does 
espouse  some  particular  tenets,  only  they  do  all  of 
them  renounce  infant-baptism. 

One  cannot  impute  this,  as  any  peculiar  fault  or 
folly,  to  the  JMinnists,  that  they  are  ajit  to  divide 
and  separate  from  one  another  on  any  small  differ- 
ences of  opinion.  It  is  a  humour  too  general,  and 
prevailing  among  many  other  people  of  that  country, 
(as  well  as  of  ours,)  to  think  that  they  ought  to 
separate  from  all  that  hold  any  thing  in  religion 
different  from  what  they  themselves  hold.  Whereas 
the  great  aim  and  interest  of  religion  is  unity  and 
communion  in  the  worship  of  God,  notwithstanding 
different  sentiments  in  points  not  fundamental ;  and 
schisms  and  parties  are  forbidden,  as  courses  that 
will  certainly  ruin  it :  there  is  no  sin  that  such 
people-  think  to  be  a  less  sin  than  schism  is.     The 


304  The  present  State  of  the  Minnists. 

CHAP,  papists  do  upbraid  the  protestants  in  general  with 
L_  this   humour ;  as   if  it  were   the   natural   principle. 


Year  after       :|  ^^iQ  millstone  ou  the  ueck  of  protestantism.     It 

the  apo-  i 

sties.  ig  too  true,  that  the  protestant  religion  and  interest 
has  been  much  impaired  by  it  in  many  countries ; 
where  it  has  grown  and  increased,  in  spite  of  the 
best  endeavours  of  the  ministers  in  shewing  and 
declaring  to  the  people  the  sinfulness  of  it.  About 
which  the  papists,  of  all  men,  should  make  no  noise, 
because  they  are  the  only  men  that  get  ground  by 
it :  they,  and  some  few  designing  persons,  who  pro- 
pose an  interest  by  heading  of  parties.  But  they 
cannot  say  that  this  is  true  of  all.  There  are  some 
protestant  countries  so  happy,  as  to  keep  their 
people  in  great  union  and  uniformity. 

But  some  of  the  Minnists  do  differ  from  the  rest, 
and  from  all  catholic  Christians,  in  points  more 
material,  and  such  as  are  indeed  inconsistent  with 
1558.  communion.  For  about  the  year  1658,  the  Soci- 
nians,  that  were  grown  to  a  considerable  number  in 
Poland,  were  expelled  thence.  Many  of  them  sought 
a  refuge  in  these  parts.  They  had  most  of  them 
added  the  opinion  of  antipsedobaptism  to  what 
Socinus  had  taught  them  against  our  Saviour's 
divinity :  and  the  common  name  by  which  they  had 
in  Poland  been  called,  was  anabaptists.  So  when 
they  came  to  Holland,  they  essayed  mostly  to  strike 
in  with  the  Minnists ;  and  they  have  since  brought 
over  many  of  them  to  their  opinion  concerning  the 
nature  of  Christ.  One  sort  of  the  Minnists,  called 
collegians,  are  generally  Socinians,  believing  in 
nothing  but  the  human  nature  of  Jesus  Christ,  and 
holding  it  unlawful  to  pray  to  him  ;  wherein  they 
surpass  the  impiety  of  Socinus  himself.     These  hold 


Dutch  Antipo'dobaptuts  comma  to  Ennland,  &;c      305 

a   general    assembly    twice    a    year   at    llliiiisburg :   chap. 

where  it  is  said  they  observe  this  order,  that  he  that 

comes  first  distributes    the    communion  to    all   the  Y*^^'"  ^^^^'■' 

the  apo- 

assistants  :  for  they  have  no  regard  to  the  ordination  sties, 
of  ministers. 

Others  of  the  Minnists  are  Arians :  of  which 
opinion  one  Galenus  ^  now  living  in  Amsterdam,  is 
said  to  be  the  chief  patron.  And  so  these  are  by 
some  called  Galenists. 

And  generally  speaking,  the  Minnists,  though 
they  do  not  all  profess  these  opinions  derogatory  to 
our  Saviour's  divinity,  yet  do  refuse  the  use  of  the 
words  Trinity,  Person,  &c.,  and  such  other  words 
concerning  the  nature  of  God,  as  are  not  in  Scrip- 
ture, but  are  used  by  the  church  to  express  the 
sense  thereof. 

The  first  Socinians  that  were  in  Holland  (for 
there  were  some  few  before  tlie  year  I  spoke  of) 
had,  as  Socinus  himself  had,  but  a  slender  opinion  of 
infants'  ba})tism  :  yet  did  not  absolutely  refuse  it. 
For  at  the  synod  of  Dort,  anno  1618.  '  was  read  the  r.siS- 
*  confession  of  the  tw^o  brothers,  John  and  Peter 
'  Geysteran,  Remonstrant  ministers :  and  was  re- 
'jected  by  all  with  detestation.  For  it  appeared 
'  that  they,  imder  the  name  of  Remonstrants,  and 
'  under  pretence  of  the  five  articles,  did  maintain  the 
'  horrid  and  execrable  blasphemies  of  Socinus  and  the 
'  anabaptists.'  So  say  the  acts*  of  the  synod.  But 
all  that  their  confession  says  of  baptism,  is ;  '  That 
'  infants  are  baptized,  not  by  any  positive  command 
*■  of  God,  but   to   avoid   scandal.'     And   that  '  they 

^  [GEiicnus  Abrah.anides  de  Haaa.j 
t  Acta  Synodi  Dordrac.  Sess.  138. 

AVALL,   VOL.   11.  X 


306  Dutch  AntipcEdobaptists  in  England 

CHAP.   '  value  the  baptism  of  the  adult  more  than  that  of 
'  infants.' 


Arapo-'"        ^^'  ^"  England  there  were  now  and  then  some 
sties.  Dutchmen    found    of   the    antipsedobaptist    opinion 

ever  since  the  time  that  it  had  taken  footing-  in 
Holland  :  but  none  of  the  English  nation  are  known 
1328.  to  have  embraced  it  in  a  long  time  after.  Danvers 
indeed  would  find  some  of  this  opinion  in  England 
even  before  those  of  Munster.  He  would  persuade  "■ 
that  the  Lollards  held  it.  But  they  held  nothing 
but  what  I  mentioned  before,  ch.  vi.  §.  7,  that 
infants  dying  unbaptized  may  yet  be  saved,  as  I 
shewed  then,  and  appears  more  fully  by  Foxe  ^. 
J433.  In  the  year  1533,  25th  of  Henry  VIH.  John 
Frith  (who  was  martyred  that  year)  wrote  a  short 
tract,  which  he  calls  a  Declaration  of  Baptism  :  (it 
is  published  with  his  other  works,  London  1573^:) 
in  it  he  takes  notice  of  the  antipaedobaptist  opinion, 
as  then  lately  risen  in  the  world,  (it  was  about 
eleven  years  standing  in  Germany,  and  was  but 
lately  got  into  Holland,  for  this  was  a  year  before 
the  outrage  and  dispersion  at  Munster).  What  he 
says  of  it  is  this  y,  '  Now   is  there  an  opinion  risen 

*  among  certain,  which  affirm  that  children  may  not 
'  be   baptized   until  they  come  unto  a  perfect  age ; 

*  and  that  because  they  have  no  faith.  But  verily 
'  methinketh  that  they  are  far  from  the  meekness  of 
'  Christ  and  his  Spirit ;  which,  when  children  were 

"  Treatise,  part  ii.  ch.  7.  pag.  303,  304. 

V  In  Henry  VI.  page  608.  [p.  661,  edit.  1583  ;  p.  868,  edit- 
1641  ;  p.  752,  edit.  1684.] 

"  [Published  with  those  of  Tyndal  and  Barnes.  See  part  ii. 
p.  90.] 

y  [At  page  93.] 


in  the  Time  of  Hen.  VIII.  Edio.  VI.  Sfc.         307 

*  brought   unto   him,    received    them    lovingly,'  &c.  chap. 
And  after  a  short  discourse,  he  breaks  off  from  that 1- 


pointthus:  'But  this  matter  will  I  pass  over;  for^^rapo^^" 
'  I  trust  the  English  (unto  whom  I  write  this)  have^*^'^^- 
*  no  such  opinions.'  And  that  the  English  Lollards 
had  been  all  along  free  from  any  such  opinion,  is 
evident  from  a  very  ancient  tract  of  theirs,  which 
they  presented  to  the  parliament,  which  is  recited 
by  one  Roger  Dimmock,  who  writes  an  answer  to  it, 
and  dedicates  that  answer  to  king  Richard  II, 
which  must  be  about  or  before  the  year  1390.  This 
tract  is  brought  to  light  from  some  ancient  manu- 
scripts at  Cambridge,  by  the  learned  Dr.  Allix,  at 
the  end  of  his  Remarks  on  the  History  of  the 
Churches  of  the  Albigenses^.  In  it  the  Lollards, 
complaining  of  popish  abuses,  reckon  this  for  one; 
the  forbidding  of  marriage,  and  keeping  men  from 
women ;  from  whence  did  follow  effects  worse  than 
those  of  fornication  itself  committed  with  women. 
For,  they  say,  though  '  slaying  of  children  ere  they 
'  be  christened,  be  full  sinful ;  yet  sodomy  was  worse,' 

The  convocation,  anno  1536,  do  take  notice  of  the  1436. 
antipaidobaptists'  opinions,  of  which  they  must  have 
heard  from  Holland  and  Germany,  (the  JVIunster 
business  having  been  two  years  before,)  and  do  pass 
some  decrees  against  them.  The  rather,  because 
some  people  in  England  began  to  speak  very  irreve- 
rently and  mockingly  about  some  of  the  ceremonies 
of  baptism  then  in  use. 

The  lower  house  of  Convocation  sent  to  the  upper 
house  a  protestation,  containing  a  catalogue  of  some 
errors  and  some  profane  sayings  that  began  to  be 
handed   about    among    some    people ;    craving   the 

z  [Chapter  xxii.  p.  205,  edit.  1C92.] 

X  2 


308  Dutch  Antipcpdobaptists  in  Englctnd 

CHAP,  concurrence    of    the    uiiper    house    in    condemning: 

VIII.  ^  a 

them.     Some  of  them  are  these  ^ : 


thrap^o-^^       17.  '  That  it  is  as  lawful  to  christen  a  child  in  a 

®^^^^'  '  tub   of  water  at  home,  or  in  a  ditch  bj  the- 

'  way,  as  in  a  font-stone  in  the  church.' 

I  think  it  may  probably  be  concluded  from  their 

expressions,  that   the   ordinary  way  of  baptizing  at 

this  time  in  England,  whether  in  the  church  or  out 

of  it,  was  by  putting  the  child  into  the  water. 

18.  '  That  the  water  in  the  font-stone  is  alonely 
'  [only]  a  thing  conjured, 

19.  '  That  the  hallowed  oil  is  no  better  than  the 
'  bishop  of  Rome's  grease  or  butter. 

63,  '  That  the  holy    water   is    more    savoury    ta 

'  make  sauce  with  than  the  other  [water],  be- 

*  cause  it   is   mixed   with  salt ;  which  is  also  a 

'  very  g*ood  medicine  for  a  horse  with  a  g'alled 

'  back :  yea,  if  there  be  put  an  onion  thereunto^ 

'  it  is  a  good  sauce  for  a  gibbet  of  mutton.' 

But  there  is  none  of  all  these  foolish  sayings  that 

reflects  any  thing  on  infant-baptism.     Yet  the  king 

1436- and   convocation   (apprehensive,  I  suppose,  of  what 

might  be)  setting  forth  several  articles  about  religion, 

to  be  diligently  preached  for  keeping  people  steady 

in  it,  have  these  about  baptism. 

1.  '  That  the  sacrament  of  baptism  was  instituted 
'  and  ordained  in  the  New  Testament  by  our 
'  Saviour  Jesus  Christ,  as  a  thing  necessary  for 
'  the  attaining  of  everlasting  life  :  according  to 
'  the  saying  of  Christ ;  Nisi  quis  renatus  fue- 
'  rit^  &c.      Unless  one  be  born  of  water,  8fc. 

2.  '  That   it    is    offered    unto   all    men,    as    well 

z  Fuller's  Church  History,  book  v.  sect.  3.  [p.  209,  211.} 


m  the  Time  of  Hen.  VIII.  Edw.  VI.  ^c.  m^ 

*  infants,  as  such  as  have  the  use  of  reason,  that  chap. 
'  by  baptism  they  shall  have  remission  of  sins,'     ^^"- 

^C.  Year  after 

S.     'Tliat  the  promise  of  grace   and  everlasting  stiesT" 
'  life,  which  promise  is  adjoined  to  the  sacra- 

*  ment  of  baptism,  pertaineth  not  only  to  such 

*  as  have  the  use  of  reason,  but  also  to  infants,' 
^^ '  they  are  made  thereby  the  very 

*  sons  and  children  of  God.     Insomuch  as  chil- 

*  dren  dying  in  their  infancy  shall  undoubtedly 
'  be  saved  thereby  :  otherwise  not. 

4.  '  Infants  must  needs  be  christened,  because  they 
'  be  born  in  original  sin  \  which  sin  must  needs 
'  be   remitted  :  which    cannot  be  done  but  by 

*  the  gi-ace   of  baptism,  whereby  they  receive 

*  the  Holy  Caiost,  which  exercises  his  grace  and 

*  efficacy  in  them,  and  cleanses  and  purifies 
'  them  from  sin  by  his  most  secret  virtue  and 
'  operation. 

6.  '  That  they  ought  to  repute  and  take  all 
'  the  anabaptists'  and  Pelagians'  opinions  con- 
'  trary  to  the  [Premises,  and  every  other  man's 

*  opinion  agreeable  unto  the  said  anabaptists' 
'  and  Pelagian's  opinions  in  this  behalf,  for  de- 
'  testable  heresies,  and  utterly  to  be  condemned.' 

These  precautions  shew,  if  there  were  at  this  time 
ill  England  no  doctrines  held  by  any  against  infant- 
baptism,  yet  that  they  feared  lest  such  should  be 
brought  over  hither.  And  two  years  after,  anno 
1538,  Fuller^  recites  out  of  Stowe,  that  'four  ana- 14.38. 

*  baptists,   three    men    and   one  woman,  all  Dutch, 
'  bare  fagots  at  Paul's  Cross :'  and  that  '  three  days 

*  after,  a  man  and  woman  of  their  sect  was  burnt  in 

"  Fuller's  Church  History,  book  v.  sect.  4.  [p.  239.] 


310  Dutch  Antipcedobaptists  in  England,  Sfc. 

CHAP.   '  Sinithfield.'     And   says,   'This   year  the  name   of 


VIII. 


'  this  sect  first  appears  in  our  English  chronicles.' 


Year  after       gy|.  Yoxe  had  SDoke  of  sonie  two  or  three  years 

the  apo-  1 

sties.  before.     For    taking    notice    of  the  influence    that 

queen  Anne  Boleyne  had  over  Henry  VIII.  he  ob- 
serves^ that  during  her  time  '  we  read  of  no  great 
'  persecution,  nor  any  abjuration  to  have  been  in  the 
'  church  of  England  :  save  only  that  the  registers  of 
'  London  make  mention  of  certain  Dutchmen,  count- 
'  ed  for  anabaptists ;  of  whom  ten  were  put  to  death 
I43S- '  in  sundry  places  of  the  realm,  anno  1535,  other 
'  ten  repented  and  were  saved.'  This  must  have 
been  the  year  before  the  said  convocation. 

The  bishop  of  Salisbury,  History  of  the  Reforma- 
tion, part  i.  book  3.  p.  195  c,  mentions  these  men, 
but  not  under  the  name  of  anabaptists.  He  says, 
that  in  May  this  year  (1535)  nineteen  Hollanders 
were  accused  of  some  heretical  opinions  :  *  Denying 
'  Christ  to  be  both  God  and  man  ;  or  that  he  took 
'  flesh  and  blood  of  the  Virgin  Mary ;  or  that  the 
'  sacraments  had  any  effect  on  those  that  received 
'  them :  in  which  opinions  fourteen  of  them  re- 
'  mained  obstinate  and  were  burnt  by  pairs  in 
'  several  places.'  Here  is  nothing  peculiarly  about 
infants'  baptism.  But  the  circumstance  of  time. 
May  1535,  leads  one  to  think  that  they  were  some 
of  them  that  were  to  have  made  a  part  in  the 
insurrection  at  Amsterdam.  For  the  author  of  an 
English    pamphlet^,   written   1647,  called  A  short 

•'  Martyrology,  p. 956.  ed.  2.    [vol.  ii.p.325,  edit.   1641.] 

c  [Edit.  fol.  Loud.  1679.] 

d  [See  '  A  short  History  of  the  Anabaptists  of  High  and  Low 
'  Germany,'  4to,  London,  1642,  [not  1647  ^^  stated  by  Wall,] 
pages  48  and  55.] 


Henry  VIII.  Edward  VI.  311- 

History  of  the  Anabaptists,  (wlio  has  made  a  good  chap. 
collection  out  of  Sleidan,  Hortentius,  &c,)  says,  that     ^^"' 


many  Dutchmen  from  several  parts,  who  had  been  ^'*^^'"  ^'^"^'" 

the  apo- 

appointed  to  assist  John  Geles  in  the  surprise  ofsties. 
Amsterdam  beforementioned,  hearing  the  ill  success, 
fled  into  England  in  two  ships.  Now  this  insur- 
rection was  on  this  very  month.  And  that  author 
reckons  those  two  ship-loads  to  be  the  first  seminary 
of  Dutch  antipaedobaptists  in  England.  But  however 
that  was,  there  were  no  English  among  them. 

But  although  during  this  king's  reign  (and  for 
a  good  while  after,  as  we  shall  see)  there  were  no 
Englishmen  that  held  any  opinion  against  infant- 
baptism  ;  yet,  as  I  said,  that  in  Germany  the  papists 
upbraided  the  protestants  with  the  name  of  anabap- 
tists, so  it  was  done  here  also  in  the  latter  times  of 
this  reign.  For  this  king  Henry  VIII,  in  a  speech 
made  at  the  proroguing  of  the  parliament,  Dec.  24, 
1545,  (recited  by  the  Lord  Herbert ^  at  that  year,) 
complaining  of  the  great  discord  among  his  subjects, 
and  of  the  reproachful  names  they  gave  one  to  an- 
other, says ;  '  What  love  and  charity  is  amongst 
'  you,  when  one  calleth  another  heretic  and  ana- 
'  baptist ;  and  he  calleth  him  again  papist,  hypocrite, 
'  and  pharisee  ?' 

In  king  Edward's  time:  in  the  third  year  of  his  1449 
reign,  Heylyn  says^;    'At  the  same  time  the   ana- 
'  baptists,  who  had  kept  themselves  unto  themselves 
*  in  the  late  king's  time,  began  to  look  abroad,  and 

e  [See  The  Life  and  Reign  of  King  Henry  the  Eighth,  by  Ed- 
ward Lord  Herbert  of  Cherbury,  folio,  London,  1649,  p.  535, 
536-] 

^  History  of  the  Reformation,  p.  73.  [of  the  third  edition.  foL 
London,  1674.] 


312  Queen  Mary. 

CHAP.   '  disperse  their  dotages  ;  for  the  preventing  ofwhicli 
'  mischief,  before  it  grew  unto  a  head,  some  of  the 


tiie^aifo-*^'  '  chiefs  of  them  were  convented,'  &c.  He  does  not 
sties.  gg^y  whether  these  were  Dutch  or  English.  And  at 
the  same  year  1549,  Ottius,  in  his  Annales  Ana- 
baptist, recites  a  letter  from  Hooper  to  Bullinger, 
wherein  he  complains  that  England  was  troubled 
with  a  sort  of  anabaptists  ;  but  reciting  their  tenets, 
he  mentions  nothing  of  infant-baptism,  nor  does  he 
say  whether  they  were  English  or  foreigners. 

In  queen  Mary's  time,  Pbilpot  had,  a  little  before 
.  his  martyrdom,  an  occasion  to  write  a  letter^  to  a 
fellow-prisoner  of  his,  to  satisfy  him  in  some  doubt© 
that  he  had  concerning  the  lawfulness  of  infant-bap- 
tism. This  shews  that  the  question  was  then  ven- 
tilated in  England.  Philpot,  besides  the  arguments 
from  Scripture,  brings  some  of  the  quotations  from 
antiquity  that  I  have  produced ;  and  concludes ; 
^  The  verity  of  antiquity  is  on  our  side ;  and  the 
'  anabaptists  have  nothing  but  lies  for  them,  and 
'  new  imaginations ;  which  feign  the  baptism  of 
'  children  to  be  the  pope's  commandment.' 

But  this  good  man  grants  a  great  deal  more  of 

the  question  in  point   of  antiquity  than   he  should 

have  done,  when  he  says  in  his  letter,  *Auxentius, 

280. '  one  of  the  Arian  sect,  with  his  adherents,  was  one 

'  of  the  first  that  denied  the  baptism  of  children  ;. 

.315  '  and   next  after   him   Pelagius    the    heretic.     And 

J 030.  '■  some  other  there  were  in  St.  Bernard's  time,,  as  it 

'  doth  appear  by  his  writings.     And    in    our    days 

'  the  anabaptists,'  &c. 

The  ground  of  his  mistake  concerning  the  Arians, 

S  Foxe,  Martyrol.  page   1670.  edit.  2.    [vol.  iii.  p.  606,  607. 
609.  edit.  1641.] 


Queen  Elizabeth.  318   . 

tliat    they   should    be    against    infants'    baptism,   is,  chap. 
that  the  Arians  are  by  some  old  writers  called  ana- 


baptists ;  but  that  was  because  they  rebaptized  all  ^ear  after 
that  had  been  baptized  by  the  catholics,  in  infancy  sties, 
or  at  age  ;  not  that  they  disliked  infants'  baptism  : 
as  I  shewed  before'".  And  the  particular  mistake 
concerning  Auxentius  must  have  been  caused  by 
those  words  of  St.  Ambrose  in  his  oration  against 
Auxentius^;  '  why  then  does  Auxentius  say,  that 
'  the  faithful  people,  who  had  been  baptized  in  the 
'name  of  the  Trinity,  must  be  baptized  again?' 
Where  any  one  that  will  read  the  place  will  see 
that  Auxentius'  reason  for  saying  so,  was  not  any 
difference  that  the  two  parties  had  about  infants' 
baptism,  but  the  different  faith  they  had  about  the 
Trinity,  in  whose  name  baptism  was  given. 

Pelagius  denied  original  sin  :  from  whence  Philpot, 
by  too  visible  a  mistake,  concluded  he  had  denied 
infants'  baptism. 

In  the  beginning  of  queen  Elizabeth's  reign,  as  '4^5- 
there  were   no   English   antipaedobaptists,   so   there 
were  very  few  left  in  Holland ;  till  after  the  revolt 
of  those  provinces  from  Spain  they  increased  again. 

For  bishop  Jewel,  in  his  Defence  of  his  Apology, 
written  about  the  seventh  year  of  this  queen,  being 
twitted  by  Harding  with  the  anabaptists  ;  '  Are  not 
'these  your  brethren?'  and  Harding  having  said 
that  the  Roman  Catholic  countries  were  cleared  of 
them,  (among  which  he  expressly  there  reckons  Base 
Almaign,  i.  e.  the  Dutch  Low  Countries,)  Jewel 
replies  to  him ;  '  They  find  harbour  amongst  you  in 

^  Ch.iv.  §.3. 

'  [S-3T-  tom.ii  p.  874,  of  the  Benedictine  edition  of  St.  Am- 
brose' works.] 


314  Quern  Elizabeth. 

CHA?p.  '  Austria,  Silesia,  Moravia,  and  such  other  countries 

VIII. 

— *  where  the  gospel  of  Christ  is  suppressed  :  but  they 

dirapo^^'''^  '  have  no  acquaintance  with  us,  neither  in  England, 
sties.  '  nor  in  Germany,  nor  in  France,  nor  in  Scotland, 
'  nor  in  Denmark,  nor  in  Sweden,  nor  in  any  place 
'  else  where  the  gospel  of  Christ  is  clearly  preached  ^.^ 
i4f>s-  From  whence  we  may  gather,  that  this  sort  of 
people  were  at  this  time  (which  was  about  forty 
years  after  their  rise)  almost  totally  suppressed  in 
all  these  parts  of  the  world. 
1472-  But  yet  about  the  sixteenth  year  of  queen  Eliza- 
beth, a  congregation  of  Dutch  antipa^dobaptists  was 
discovered  without  Aldgate  in  London  ;  whereof 
twenty-seven  were  taken  and  imprisoned.  And 
the  next  month  one  Dutchman  and  ten  women 
were  condemned.  One  woman  recanted  ;  eight  were 
banished ;  two  were  burnt  in  Smithfield,  as  Fuller' 
out  of  Stowe  relates.  Their  tenets  are  recited  these ; 
'  Infants  not  to  be  baptized.  Christians  not  to  use 
'  the  sword.  All  oaths  unlawful.  Christ  took  not 
*  flesh  of  the  Virgin  Mary.'  This  agrees  in  every 
point  with  the  account  given  before  of  the  doctrine 
of  the  Minnists.  These  were  the  first  that  that  queen 
ever  caused  to  be  burnt  for  any  opinion  in  religion. 

Foxe,  that  wrote  the  Book  of  Martyrs,  was  then 
living ;  and  he  ventured  to  intercede  with  the  queen 
for  the  life  of  those  two,  but  could  not  prevail ;  she 
shewing  such  a  sense  of  the  necessity  of  suppressing 
any  new  sect  by  severity  at  the  beginning.  In  his 
letter  to  her  there  are  these  words :  '  As  for  their 
'  errors  indeed,  no  man  of  sense  can  deny  that  they 

k   [See  The  Defence  of  the  Apology,  part  i.  chapter  4.  division  3. 
page  25,  26,  of  Jewel's  Works,  fol.  London,  1609.] 
1  Church  History,  9th  book,  sect.  3.  [p.  104.] 


Queen  Elizabeth.  315 

*  are  most  absurd;  and  I  wonder  that  such   mon-  chap. 

*  strous  opinions  could  come  into  the  mind  of  any !_ 

'  Christian.     But  such  is  the  state  of  human  weak- J,*^'"'" '''^'*''" 

the  apo- 

*  ness ;  if  we  are  left  never  so  little  a  while  destitute  sties. 
'  of  the  Divine  light,  whither  is  it  that  we  do  not 

'  fall  ?  And  there  is  great  reason  to  give  God 
'  thanks   on   this   account,  that  I  hear  not  of  any 

*  Englishman  that  is  inclined  to  that  madness,'  &c. 
He  entreats  the  queen  that  these  two  may  be 
banished  as  the  rest  were ;  or  otherwise  punished. 
'  But  to  roast  alive  the  bodies  of  poor  wretches, 
'  that  offend  rather  by  blindness  of  judgment  than 

*  perverseness  of  will,  in  fire  and  flames  raging  with 
'  pitch  and  brimstone,  is  a  hardhearted  thing,  and 
'  more  agreeable  to  the  practice  of  the  Romanists, 
'  than  the  custom  of  the  Evangelics"^' 

From  his  words  Fuller  concludes,  that  this  opinion 
had  not  then  taken  any  footing  among  the  English  : 
for  Foxe  was  likely  to  know  if  it  had. 

VI.  At  what  time  it  began  to  be  embraced  by 
any  English  I  do  not  find  it  easy  to  discover.  But 
it  is  plain  that  no  very  considerable  number  in 
England  were  of  this  persuasion  till  about  sixty  1541- 
years  ago.  The  first  book  (except  some  books  taken 
in  a  Jesuit's  trunk,  which  he  had  brought  over  on 
purpose  to  spread  this  opinion,  which  I  must  mention 
by  and  by,  but  except  them  the  first)  that  ever  1 
heard  of,  that  was  set  forth  in  English,  u})holding 
this  tenet,  was  a  Dutch  book,  called  A  plain  and 
well  grounded  Treatise  concerning  Baptism.  This 
was  translated  and  printed  in  English  anno  1618,  'S'^- 
the  sixteenth  year  of  James  the  First.     But  neither 

™  Ibid.  [Fuller  gives  the  letter,  which  is  in  Latin,  from  Foxe's 
own  handwriting.] 


^16  The  Increase  of  Antipcedobaptism 

CHAP,  in   that  king's  reign,   nor  in   that  of  Lis  son  king 

_  Charles  the  First,  till  toward  the  latter  end  of  it, 

thrapo-^^"^  ^^^V6  we   any  account   of  any  considerable  number 
sties.         (3f  people  of  this  way,  very  little  mention  of  them, 
or  of  that  question,  in  any  English  books. 
1545-      Dr.  Featly,  who  wrote  in  1645,  says  in  his  pre- 
face ;  *  This  fire  in  the  reigns  of  queen  Elizabeth, 
'  king  James,  and  our  gracious  sovereign,  till  now, 

*  was  covered  in  England  under  the  ashes ;  or  if  it 
'  broke  out  at  any  time,  by  the  care  of  the  eccle- 
'  siastical  and  civil  magistrates  it  was  soon  {)ut  out. 

*  But  of  late,  since  the  unhappy  distractions, 

'  this  sect  hath  rebaptized  hundreds  of  men  and 
'  women  together  in  the  twilight,  in  rivulets,  and 
'  some  arms  of  the  Thames,'  &c.  And  in  his  letter 
to  Mr.  Downham,  (prefixed  to  the  above-named 
work,)  mentioning  the  great  increase  of  monstrous 
sects  and  heresies  at  that  time,  especially  of  papists 
and  anabaptists,  he  says,  '  They  boast  of  their  great 
'  draught  of  fish  ;  the  papists  of  twenty  thousand 
'  proselytes,  the  anabaptists  of  forty-seven  churches".' 
Upon  which  view  of  sects  arising  in  such  times,  he 
does  in  another  place  of  his  book  set  forth  the  mis- 
chiefs of  a  general  toleration  in  any  state  :  which 
observation  of  the  doctor's,  made  upon  the  first 
toleration  that  had  ever  been  in  England,  the  ex- 
perience of  all  times  since  following,  has  shewn 
to  be  a  just  one.  None  can  deny  but  that  this 
evil  does  follow  upon  it,  how  necessary  soever  it 
may  sometimes  be  on  other  respects. 

1542.      It  was  during  the  rebellion  against  king  Charles  I, 

n  [See  '  The  Dippers  dipt :  or  the  Anabaptists  ducked  and 
'  plunged  over  head  and  ears,  at  a  disputation  in  Southwark  : 
'  by  Daniel  Featly,  D.D.  4to,  sixth  edition,  London,  1651.'] 


in  England.  317 

and  the  usurpation  of  Oliver  Cromwell,   tliat  this  chap. 

opinion   began  to   have   any  great  number  of  con- L_ 

verts  to  it.  In  those  times  of  stirs,  they  boasted  in  J^^Ipf.*"' 
their  books  that  that  prophecy  was  fulfilled ;  7nau2/^^]^^- 
shall  run  to  and  fro^  and  knoidedfje  shall  be  in- 
■creased"^.  That  usurper  gave  not  only  a  toleration, 
but  great  encouragement  to  all  sorts  of  religions 
that  opposed  the  church  of  England  and  the  pres- 
byterians.  Neither  of  these  could  he  trust ;  but 
laboured  to  weaken  them  what  he  could.  And  the 
more  dissenters  and  separaters  there  were  from 
these,  the  safer  he  reckoned  he  sat.  The  event  of 
these  joining  afterward  together  to  vindicate  their 
country  from  tyranny  and  utter  confusion,  shewed 
that  he  was  in  the  right. 

In  these  times  of  general  liberty,  this  opinion 
increased  mightily ;  many  owning  it  out  of  con- 
science, {we  must  in  charity  judge,)  as  thinking  it  to 
be  the  truth  ;  but  many  also  for  advantage.  For 
Oliver,  next  to  his  darling  Independents,  favoured 
this  sort  of  men  most;  and  his  army  was  in  great 
part  made  up  of  them.  You  must  suppose,  then, 
that  they  left  out  of  their  scheme  of  doctrines  that 
tenet  of  the  Minnists,  *  that  the  sword  is  not  to  be 
'  made  use  of  by  Christians ;'  for  they  had,  many 
of  them,  the  places  of  troopers,  captains,  nmjor- 
generals,  committee-men,  sequestrators,  &c. 

It  appears  by  a  passage  in  the  life  of  judge  Hale^i,  1558. 
how  much   that   party  was  favoured  at  that   time. 
For  it  is  there  related  how  that  judge  having  the 
case  brought  before  him  '  of  some  anabaptists  who 

^  Daniel  xii.  4. 

q  Burnet's  Life  and  Death  of  Sir  Matthew  Hale,  p.  44.  [8vo. 
London,  16S2  ;   and  frequently  reprinted.] 


318  The  Increase  of  AntipcBdohaptism 

CHAP.  '  had  rushed  into  a  church,  and  disturbed  a  con^re- 


VIII 


gation  while  they  were  receiving  the  sacrament, 
xhel^o^^^  '  i^ot  without  some  violence ;  at  this  he  was  highly 
sties.  «  offended.  For  he  said  it  was  intolerable  for  men, 
*  who  pretended  so  highly  to  liberty  of  conscience, 
'  to  go  and  disturb  others,  &c.  But  these  were  so 
'  supported  by  some  great  magistrates  and  officers, 
'  that  a  stop  was  put  to  his  proceedings.  Upon 
'  which  he  declared,  he  would  meddle  no  more  with 
'  the  trials  on  the  crown  side.'  Yet  some  time 
before  the  death  of  the  usurper,  many  of  the  anti- 
paedobaptists  as  well  as  of  the  other  separate  j^arties 
that  had  raised  him,  fell  into  a  dislike  of  him,  and 
he  of  them.  So  far  that  he,  as  one  captain  Dean 
relates,  cashiered  several  of  them ;  and  they,  as 
the  lord  chancellor  Clarendon  relates,  entered  into 
several  conspiracies  to  assassinate  him. 

I  have  been  advertised  that  I  ought  in  this  se- 
cond edition  to  insert,  in  order  to  their  vindiciition, 
their  address  to  king  Charles  IT,  recited  by  that 
noble  lord  in  the  fifteenth  book  of  his  excellent 
History  of  the  Rebellion''.  I  will  therefore  give 
the  substance  of  it  in  short ;  being  sorry  that  it  does 
not  tend  more  to  their  credit  than  it  does.  They 
(as  well  as  all  the  other  parties  of  that  time  except 
the  churchmen)  seem  to  have  returned  to  their 
allegiance  to  the  king,  not  out  of  conscience,  but 
because  they  found  themselves  undone  without  him. 
Several  sorts  and  sects  of  men  joined  in  the 
address ;  but  it  was  sent  to  the  king,  being  then 
at  Bruges,  by  a  gentleman,  an  antipaedobaptist  of 
special    trust    among    them.     They    recount    how 

r  [At  the  year  1658:  vol.  iii.  p.  488,   &c.  of  the  foho   edit, 
1704;  and  vol.  vii.  p.  254,  &c.  edit.  8vo.  Oxford,  1826.] 


in  England.  319 

under  king  Charles  I.  there  had  been  '  many  errors,  chap. 
'  defects,  excesses,  irregularities,  &c.,  as   blots  and 


'  stains  upon  the  otherwise  good  government  of  ^j^^^^^*^^"" 
'  that  king ;'  whom  they  own  to  have  been  '  of  the  ^'i^^s- 
'  best  and  purest  morals  of  any  prince  that  ever 
'  swayed  the  English  sceptre :'  that  the  parliament 
had  raised  war  to  free  him  from  '  evil  counsellors :' 
that  they  among  the  rest,  had  on  this  account  taken 
arms :  and  that  though  they  are  since  sensible  that 
under  pretence  of  '  liberty  and  reformation,'  the 
secret  designs  of  '  wicked  and  ambitious  persons' 
had  been  hid  ;  yet  that  they  themselves  had  '  gone 
'  out  in  the  simplicity  of  their  souls,'  having  never 
had  thoughts  of  '  casting  off  their  allegiance,  or 
'  extirpating  the  royal  family,'  but  only  of  '  re- 
'  straining  the  excesses  of  government.  Thus  far,' 
they  say,  '  they  had  gone  right,'  and  had  '  as  yet 
'  done  nothing  but  what  they  thought  themselves 
'  able  to  justify'  [strange  that  they  could  say  this]. 
But  that  in  all  their  motions  since  they  had  been 
*  roving  up  and  down  in  all  the  untrodden  paths  of 
'  fanatic  notions ;'  and  now  found  themselves  '  in- 
'  volved  in  so  many  labyrinths  and  meanders  of 
'  knavery,'  that  they  know  not  how  to  extricate 
themselves.  '  Into  what  crimes,  impieties,  wicked- 
'  nesses,  and  unheard-of  villainies,  have  we,'  say 
they,  '  been  led,  cheated,  cozened,  and  betrayed,  by 
'  that  grand  impostor,  that  loathsome  hypocrite, 
'  that  detestable  traitor,  that  prodigy  of  nature,  &c. 

'  who   now  calls   himself  our  protector ! We 

'  have  trampled  under  foot  all  authorities  ;  we  have 
'  laid  violent  hands  upon  our  own  sovereign  ;  we 
'  have  ravished  our  parliaments,  &c. :  we  have  put  a 
'  yoke,  a  heavy  yoke  of  iron,  upon  the  necks  of  our 


320  The  Increase  of  Antipcedohaptism 

*^  vm^   *  own    countrymen  ;  broken    oaths,    vows,    engage- 
'  ments,  covenants,  &c.,  lifted  up  our  hands  to  hea- 

Year  aftei-  ■>         •   c   ^^ 

the  apo-      '  ven  deceitiuUy ; — and  added  hypocrisy  to  all  our 

'  sins. We  were  sometime  wise  to  pull  down ; 

'  but  we  now  want  art  to  build.  We  were  ino-e- 
'  nious  to  pluck  up  ;  but  we  have  no  skill  to  plant. 

*  We  were  strong  to  destroy ;  but  we  are  weak  to 
'  restore.  Whither  shall  we  go  for  help  ?  If  to  par- 
'  liaments;  they  are  broken  reeds.     If  we  turn  to 

*  the  army ;  they  are  a  rod  of  iron  to  bruise  us. 
'  If  we  go  to  him  who  had  treacherously  usurped, 
'  and  does  tyrannically  exercise  an  unjust  power 
'  over  us,  &c. ;  he  says,  "  I  have  chastised  you  with 
'  whips,    and    will    henceforward     with    scorpions." 

' At  last  we  began  to  whisper  among  our- 

'  selves, — "  Why  should  we  not  return  to  our  first 
'  husband?"  &c.' 

And  so  (after  many  long  turns  of  canting  expres- 
sions) they  come  at  last  to  this ;  that  they  find 
themselves  engaged  in  duty,  honour,  and  conscience, 
to  make  this  humble  address,  &c. ;  but  yet  declare 
that  '  lest  they  should  seem  altogether  negligent  of 

*  that  first  good  cause,  which  God  had  so  eminently 
'  owned  them  in,'  &c.,  they  think  it  necessary  to 
offer  the  following  propositions,  (which  his  lordship 
justly  calls  'extravagant  and  wild'  ones,)  to  which  if 
his  majesty  would  condescend,  then  they  would 
hazard  their  lives  to  re-establish  him. 

1.  '  That  the  king  do  resettle  the  long  parliament, 
'  with  the  excluded  members. 

2.  '  That  he  ratify  all  the  concessions  made  by 
'  his  father  at  the  treaty  in  the  Isle  of  Wight. 
'  [Now  those  concessions  were  (as  this  noble 
'  historian  observes  in  another  place,  book  16. 


in  England.  321 

*  p.  723,  &c.  ed.  Oxf.  1706. 0  "  Such  as  in  truth   chap. 
'  did,  with  the  preservation  of  the  name  and     ^^^'' 


*  life    of  the  kin^,    near  as  much   establish    a  Y^^""  ^^'^r 

.11.  the  apo- 

republican  government    as    was   settled   after  sties. 

*  his  murder."  And  such  as  "  his  Majesty 
'  yielded  to  with  much  less  cheerfulness  than 
'  he  walked  to  the  scaffold."] 

S.  '  That  he  should  set  up  an  universal  toleration 
'  of  all  religions.' 

4.  '  Abolish  all  payment  of  tithes.' 

5.  *  Pass  a  general  act  of  oblivion.' 

The  gentleman  added  in  a  letter  of  his  own,  that 
he  desired  the  sura  of  two  thousand  pounds  to  be 
remitted  to  him  fi-om  the  king;  which  sum  not 
being  at  that  time  in  his  majesty's  power,  this 
proposal  came  to  nothing. 

It  was  by  reason  of  the  increase  which  had  been 
of  this  opinion  in  those  times,  that  the  convocation 
which  sat  presently  after  the  restauration  of  king 
Charles  II,  when  they  made  a  review  of  the  Book^s6i. 
of  Common  Prayer,  found  it  necessary  to  add  to  it 
an  office  for  the  baptism  of  those,  who  having  been 
born  in  those  times,  had  not  yet  been  baptized; 
whereof  there  were  many  that  were  now  grown  too 
old  to  be  baptized  as  infants,  and  ought  to  make 
profession  of  their  own  faith.  They  give  in  the 
preface  to  the  said  book  an  account  of  the  occa- 
sion that  made  this  necessary  then,  though  not 
formerly,  in  these  words ;  *  Together  with  an  office 
'  for  the  baptism  of  such  as  are  of  riper  years. 
*  Which  although  not  so  necessary  when  the  former 
'  book  was  compiled  ;  yet  by  the  growth  of  anabap- 

r  [Vol.  iii.  p.  565.  fol.  edit.  1702.] 

WALL,  VOL,  II.  Y 


322  The  Present  State  of 

CHAP.  '  tism,  through  the  licentiousness  of  the  late  times 
viii.  .  .  , 

crept  in  among  us,  is  now  become  necessary. 


^^^\^^f^  The  parliament,  assembled  upon  the  said  restau- 
sties.  ration,  expressed  the  dislike  the  nation  had  con- 
ceived against  the  tenets  and  behaviour  of  these 
men;  when  making  an  act  for  the  confirming  all 
ministers  in  the  possession  of  their  benefices,  how 
heterodox  soever  they  had  been,  provided  they 
would  conform  for  the  future,  they  excepted  such 
as  had  been  of  this  way. 

It  is  to  be  noted,  that  when  this  opinion  began 
first  to  increase,  they  did  not  all  of  them  proceed 
to  separation  from  the  established  church ;  they 
held  it  suflftcient  to  declare  their  sentiment  against 
infant-baptism,  to  reserve  their  own  children  to 
adult-baptism,  and  to  be  baptized  with  it  them- 
selves ;  without  renouncing  communion  in  prayers, 
and  in  the  other  sacrament,  with  the  pgcdobaptists. 
^545- In  the  year  1645,  when  Marshall  had  in  a  sermon 
objected  to  the  antipaedobaptists  the  sin  of  separa- 
tion, Tombes  answers  %  that  this  was  practised 
only  by  some :  that  it  was  the  fault  of  the  persons, 
not  of  the  principle  of  antipsedobaptism  :  that  he 
himself  abhorred  it :  and  he  quotes,  as  concurring 
1544.  with  him,  '  the  Confession  of  Faith^  in  the  name  of 
'  seven  Churches  of  AntijDsedobaptists  in  London, 
*  Art.  33.' 

But  these  that  continued  in  communion  were  not 
for  Oliver's  turn.  There  was  great  care  taken  to 
instil  into  them  principles  of  total  separation ; 
which  proved  too  ejBfectual:  and  within  a  while 
they  did  all,   or   almost  all,    renounce  the   settled 

s  Examen,  part  ii.  §.  9.  [p.  31.  edit.  1645.] 

t  [Published  at  London,  in  4to,  in  the  year  1644.] 


Antipadobaptism  in  England.  B23 

congregations,  and  became  great  enemies  to  them.   chap. 
In    wliicli    separation    they    do    still,    almost    all, _ 

,  •  Year  after 

contmue.  the  ^^^_ 

The  present  state  of  them  is  this  :  ®*'^^- 

They  that  are  now,  are  as  commendable  as  any 
other  sort  of  men  are,  for  a  sober  and  grave,  qniet 
and  peaceable  way  of  living.  They  profess  obedi- 
ence to  magistrates:  and  they  will  commonly  ex- 
press a  dislike  and  abhorrence  of  those  plunderings 
and  other  violences  committed  by  some  of  their 
party,  as  well  as  by  the  rest  of  the  army  of  that 
nsurper  aforesaid,  of  odious  memory.  They  are 
particularly  commended  for  maintaining  their  poor 
liberally,  (which  is  a  way  that  never  fails  to  attract 
the  good-will  of  the  multitude,  and  to  make 
proselytes,)  as  also  for  passing  censures  upon  such 
members  of  their  own  congregations  as  live  dis- 
orderly. 

This  character,  of  obedient  subjects,  is  what  they 
now  own  and  profess  ;  and  what  I  hope  is  the  real 
sentiment  of  most  of  them.  One  Mr.  Hicks  did  in- 
deed about  twenty  years  ago  (if  what  was  informed 
against  him  were  true)  give  a  most  ugly  and  re- 
proachful account  of  the  whole  body  of  this  people 
as  to  this  point. 

There  was  at  that  time,  1683,  a  villainous  conspi- 
racy, headed  by  Shaftsbury,  Monmouth,  &c.,  against 
king  Charles  ;  either  to  murder,  or  at  least  depose 
him.  The  conspirators  sent  their  emissaries  about, 
to  see  what  numbers  and  parties  of  the  people  could 
be  drawn  in  to  join  in  the  rebellion.  And  amongst 
other  discoveries  made  afterward  of  this  treason, 
there  was  this  following  information  given  upon 
oath  by  one    Mr.  West  of  the   Temple,  which    is 

Y  2 


324  The  present  State  of 

CHAP,  printed    in    the   account   of  that    plot.     Copies   of 

L  Informations,  p.  41. 

Year  after       «  xhis   Gxaminant    further    says,    That    Mr.  Roe 

the  apo-  '' 

sties.         <  told  this  examinant,  that  he  had  discoursed  with 
'  one  Mr.  Hicks  a  tobacconist,  an  anabaptist  preacher, 

*  a  great  ringleader  of  the  anabaptists ;  and  that 
'  the  said  Hicks  had  told  him  that  the  anabaptists 
'  could,    and    he   believed  upon  good   consideration 

*  would,  make  up  an  army  of  twenty  thousand  men, 
'  and  fifteen  hundred  of  the  twenty  thousand  would 

*  be  horse  :  and  though  perhaps  there  would  be  a 
'  necessity  of  making  use  of  some  great  men  at  the 
'  beginning,  (and  this  examinant  thinks  he  men- 
'  tioned  the  duke  of  Monmouth,)  yet  when  the 
'  anabaptists  were  once  up,  they  would  not  lay  down 
'  their  arms  till  they  had  their  own  terms.' 

If  Hicks  did  never  say  so,  he  ought  to  have 
publicly  disowned  it.  And  if  he  did,  the  antipae- 
dobaptists  ought  to  have  disowned  him  from  being 
a  leader.  Whether  either  of  them  were  done,  or 
whether  Hicks  be  now  living,  I  know  not.  God 
Almighty  keep  all  sorts  of  people  from  such  leaders, 
as  will  lead  them  in  a  way  to  which  the  Scripture 
expressly  assigns  damnation.  But  however,  there 
were  but  two  men  of  the  twenty  thousand  that 
appeared  then  to  have  been  guilty ;  and  those  two 
were  among  some  of  the  first  that  made  an  ingenu- 
ous and  voluntary  confession.  And  besides,  it  is  not 
credible  that  that  party  of  men  could  at  that  time 
have  made  up  such  a  number,  if  they  had  been 
never  so  unanimous  in  the  wickedness.  P.S.  I  hear 
since  "  that  Hicks  is  dead  ;   but  that  he  lived  in  Lon- 

"  [His  informant  was  Mr.  Stennett ;  see  '  Defence,'  chapter 
vi.] 


Antipcedobciptism  in  England.  325 

don  many  years   after  this;    and   that  the   foresaid   chap. 
accnsation  was  not    made    good   against  liim ;    but     ^^^^' 


that  king  Cliarles  II,  upon  a  hearing  of  his  case  iny^^''»^"^«'' 

'-'  '  ~  tlie  apo- 

council,  discharged  him.  sties. 

The  number  of  them  had  been  considerably  1560. 
abated  upon  the  restauration,  and  tlie  resettling  of 
the  church  of  England.  Many  at  that  time  re- 
turned to  the  church,  and  brought  the  children 
which  they  had  had  in  the  mean  time,  to  be  bap- 
tized according  to  the  order  thereof.  And  during 
the  remainder  of  king  Charles'  reign  the  number  of 
them  stood  much  at  a  stay,  or  rather  decreased ; 
but  since  late  times  of  general  liberty  and  tolera-1587. 
tion,  they  have  increased  again.  In  some  of  the 
counties  of  England  they  are  the  most  numerous  of 
any  sort  of  men  that  do  separate  from  the  established 
church.  This  is  chiefly  in  the  east  parts  ;  Essex, 
Kent,  Sussex,  Surrey,  &c.  There  are  very  few  in 
those  parts  that  make  any  separation  from  the 
church,  but  they.  Which  is  the  occasion  that  I,  as 
I  am  placed  in  those  parts^  have  the  more  minded 
what  I  have  read  in  any  ancient  book  relating  to 
that  question ;  from  whence  have  s])rung  the  notes, 
that  make  the  first  part  of  this  work.  In  other 
parts  of  England  they  are  much  over-numbered 
by  the  Quakers.  There  are  also  great  numbers  of 
them  in  London  and  the  suburbs.  And  it  is  ob- 
served from  some  late  passages,  that  the  presbyte- 
rians  look  as  if  they  would  court  their  friendship, 
and  as  if  they  aimed  to  add  this  stick  also  to  the 
other  two. 

Their  tenets  are,  besides  the  denying  infants'  bap- 
tism, these : 

^  [He  was  at  this  time  vicar  of  Shoreham  in  Kent.] 


326  Tlie  present  State  of 

CHAP.        1.  They  do  many  of  them  hold  it  necessary,  as  I 
'__  said,  to  renounce  communion  with  all  Christians  that 

Year  after  j^j.g  -^^^  ^f  their  wav.      Many  of  them  are  so  pe- 
ine apo-  J  J  1 

Sties.  remptory  in  this,  that  if  they  be  in  the  chamber  of 

a  sick  man,  and  any  paedobaptist,  minister  or  other, 
come  in  to  pray  with  him,  they  will  go  out  of  the 
room.  And  if  they  be  invited  to  the  funeral  of  any 
p<3edobaptist,  they  will  go  to  the  house,  and  accom- 
pany the  corpse  with  the  rest  of  the  people  to  the 
church  door :  but  there  they  retreat ;  they  call  it  the 
Steeple-house.  They  seem  to  judge  thus :  those 
that  are  not  baptized  are  no  Christians,  and  none 
are  baptized  but  themselves.  So  they  make  not  only 
baptism  itself,  but  also  the  time,  or  age,  or  way  of 
receiving  it,  a  fundamental. 

It  is  strange  to  see  how  deeply  this  principle  of 
division  is  rooted  in  some  of  them  by  the  care  that 
many  of  their  teachers  take  to  cultivate  it.  If  any 
one  that  has  been  one  of  them,  be  afterward  pre- 
vailed on  to  go  ordinarily  to  church,  and  hold  com- 
munion in  all  things  that  he  can,  though  he  keep 
still  his  opinion  of  antipsedobaptism,  they  of  them 
that  are  of  this  principle  bemoan  him  as  a  lost  man ; 
and  speak  of  him  as  we  should  do  of  one  that  had 
turned  an  apostate  from  the  Christian  religion.  If 
any  man,  being  not  satisfied  with  the  baptism  he  re- 
ceived in  infancy,  do  desire  to  be  baptized  again  by 
them,  but  do  at  the  same  time  declare  that  he  means 
to  keep  communion  with  the  established  church  in  all 
things  that  in  conscience  he  can  ;  there  are  (or  at  least 
have  been)  several  of  their  elders  that  Mill  not  bap- 
tize such  a  man.  To  renounce  '  the  Devil  and  all  his 
'  works,'  &c.  has  been  always  required  of  ])ersons 
to  be  baptized  into  the  Christian  religion  ;  but  to 


Antipcedohaptism  in  England.  327 

require  them  to  renounce  communion  with  all  Chris-  chap. 
tians,  that  are  not  of  their  opinion,  is  to  baptize  into L 


a  sect.  It  is  a  clear  case  from  Scripture,  and  par- ^^^^  ^^''^'^ 
ticularly  from  Phil.  iii.  15,  16,  that  the  duty  of  sties. 
Christian  unity  does  require  that  they  (and  the  same 
is  to  be  said  of  all  others  that  differ  not  in  fundamen- 
tals) should  hold  communion  as  far  as  they  can ; 
even  though  they  do  still  continue  in  their  opinion 
for  adult-baptism.  Of  which  I  shall  say  something 
more  in  the  last  chapter. 

I  said  before  that  this  scrupulous  stiffness  is  not 
universal  among  them.  Tombes  and  several  more 
had,  and  some  of  them  still  have,  truer  sentiments 
concerning  '  the  communion  of  saints  in  the  catholic 
*  church.'  And  I  have  received  of  late  a  credible 
account,  that  the  most  considerable  men,  and  of  chief 
repute  among  them^,  do  more  and  more  come  over 
to  these  sentiments. 

2.  They  are,  more  generally  than  the  antipsedo- 
baptists  of  other  nations,  possessed  with  an  opinion 
of  the  absolute  necessity  of  the  immersion,  or  dip- 
ping the  baptized  person  over  head  and  ears  into  the 
water.  So  far,  as  to  allow  of  no  clinical  baptism : 
i.  e.  If  a  man  that  is  sick  in  a  fever,  &c.  (so  as  that 
he  cannot  be  put  into  the  water  without  endanger- 
ing his  life)  do  desire  baptism  before  he  dies ;  they 
will  let  him  die  unbaptized,  rather  than  baptize  him 
by  affusion  of  water  on  his  face,  &c. 

They  are  contrary  in  this  to  the  primitive  Christ- 
ians. They,  though  they  did  ordinarily  put  the 
person  into  the  water,  yet  in  case  of  sickness,  &c. 
would  baptize  him  in  his  bed. 

y  [Compare  Wall's  Defence,  chap.  vi.  in  reply  to  Gale's  re- 
mark at  p.  239.  of  his  Reflections.] 


328  Concerning  Separation^  Immersion. 

CHAi'.        They  bring  three  proofs  of  the  necessity  of  im- 

1_  mersion  or  clipping. 

IC^o-'       I-  'The    example    of  John   baptizing  Christ,    of 
^*''^*-  '  Philip  ba])tizing  the  eunuch,  and  generally  of 

'  the   ancient   Christians    baptizing   by  immer- 

'  sion.' 

2.  *  That  baptism  ought,  as  much  as  may  be,  to 
'  resemble  the  death  and  burial  and  rising 
'  again  of  Christ.' 

3.  '  That  the  word  to  baptize,  does  necessarily 
'  include  dipping  in  its  signification ;  so  that 
*  Christ,  by  commanding  to  l)aptize,  has  com- 
'  manded  to  dip.' 

To  which  these  answers  are  commonly  given  r 

The  first  proves  what  was  said  before,  that  in 
Scripture  times,  and  in  the  times  next  succeeding, 
it  was  the  custom  in  those  hot  countries  to  baptize 
ordinarily  by  immersion:  but  not  that  in  cases  of 
sickness,  or  other  such  extraordinary  occasions,  they 
never  baptized  otherwise.  Of  this  I  shall  speak  in 
the  next  chapter. 

The  second  proves,  that  dipping,  where  it  may 
safely  be  used,  is  the  most  fitting  manner.  But  our 
Saviour  has  taught  us  a  rule,  Matt.  xii.  3,  4,  7,  that 
what  is  needful  to  preserve  life,  is  to  be  preferred 
before  outward  ceremonies. 

The  third,  which  would,  if  it  were  true,  be  more 
conclusive  than  the  rest,  is  plainly  a  mistake.  The 
word  jSaiTTi^o}  in  Scripture  signifies  to  wash  in  gene- 
ral, without  determining  the  sense  to  this  or  that 
sort  of  M^ashing.  The  sense  of  a  Scripture  word 
is  not  to  be  taken  from  the  use  of  it  in  secular 
authors,  but  from  the  use  of  it  in  the  Scripture. 
What  (SaTTTi^o)  signifies  among  Greek  writers,  and 


Concerning  Separation,  Immersion.  S29 

what  interpretation  critics  and  lexicons  do  accord-  chap, 

VIII. 


ingly  give  it,  is  not  nuich  to  the  purpose  in  this  - 
case  to  dispute,  (though  they  also,  as  Mr.  Walker  in  the  apo- 
his  Doctrine  of  Baptism  ^^  has  largely  shewn,  beside  ^'^^®^* 
the  signification  imniergo^  do  give  that  of  lavo  in 
general,)  when  the  sense  in  which  it  is  used  by 
the  penmen  of  Scripture  may  otherwise  be  plainly 
determined  from  Scripture  itself.  Now  in  order  to 
such  a  determination,  these  two  things  are  jilain : 

First,  that  to  baptize  is  a  word  applied  in  Scrip- 
ture not  only  to  such  washing  as  is  by  dipping  into 
the  water  the  thing  or  person  washed ;  but  also 
to  such  as  is  by  pouring  or  rubbing  water  on  the 
thing  or  person  washed,  or  some  part  of  it. 

Secondly,  That  the  sacramental  washing  is  often 
in  Scripture  expressed  by  other  words  beside  bap- 
tizing; which  other  words  do  signify  washing  in 
the  ordinary  and  general  sense. 

For  the  first  there  are,  besides  others,  these  plain 
instances . 

The  Jews  thought  it  a  piece  of  religion,  to  wash 
their  hands  before  dinner  :  they  blame  the  disciples, 
Mark  vii.  5,  for  eating  with  umvashen  hands.  The 
word  here  is  vItttw,  an  ordinary  word  for  washing 
the  hands.  Their  way  of  that  washing  was  this: 
they  had  servants  to  pour  the  water  on  their  hands, 
2  Kings  iii.  11.  who  poured  water  on  the  hands  of 
Elijah,    i.   e.    who    waited    on    him    as    a    servant^. 

z  [See  '  The  Doctrine  of  Baptisms ;  or  a  discourse  of  dipping 
'  and  sprinkling :  wherein  is  shewed  the  lawfulness  of  other 
'  ways  of  baptization,  besides  that  of  a  total  immersion.  By 
'  William  Walker,  B.  D.'  8vo.  London,  1678.] 

»  Dr.  Pocock  has  largely  proved  from  Maimonides  and  others 
this  was  the  Jews'  way.     '  Non  lavant  manus  nisi  e  vase  affusa 


330  Concerning  Separation^  Immersion. 

CHAP.  Now  this  washino-  of  the  hands  is   called   by  St. 

VIII 

Luke  the  baptizing-  of  a  man,  or  the  man's  being 

thrapo-'"'  baptized,  Luke  xi.  38.     For  where  the  English  is, 
sties.  XJiQ  Pharisee  marvelled  that  he  had  not  washed  before 

dinner;  St.  Luke's  own  words  are,  on  ov  Trpcorov 
e/SaTTTicrOr]  irpo  tov  aplcrrov,  '  that  he  was  not  baptized 
*  before  dinner.'  And  so  they  are  translated  in  the 
Latin.  A  plain  instance,  that  they  used  the  word 
to  baptize  for  any  ordinary  washing,  whether  there 
were  dipping  in  the  case  or  not. 

Also  that  which  is  translated,  Mark  vii.  4,  the 
washhig  of  pots,  cups,  brasen  vessels,  tables^  is  in 
the  original,  the  baptizing  of  pots,  &c.  And  what 
is  there  said.  When  they  come  from  market^  except 
they  wash,  they  eat  not ;  the  words  of  St.  Mark  are, 
Except  they  he  baptized,  they  eat  7wt^\  And  the 
divers  washings  of  the  Jews  are  called  Siacpopoi  ^air- 
Tia-fAo],  divers  baptisms,  Heb.  ix.  10.  Of  which  some 
were  by  bathing,  others  by  sprinkling.  Numb.  viii.  7. 
Item  xix.  18,  19- 

For  the  second  there  are  these : 
Baptism  is  styled  Xovrpov  tov  vSaro?,  the  washing 
of  water^  Eph.  v.  26.  Xovrpov  rJ/?  TraXiyyevecriag,  the 
washing  of  regeneration,  Tit.  iii.  5.  And  to  express 
this  saying;  having  our  bodies  baptized  with  clean 
water ;  the  apostle  words  it,  XeXoup-evoi  to  a-wfxa, 
having  our  bodies  washed,  koI  eppavTia-fj-evoL  to.?  Kap- 
Sia?,  and  our  hearts  sprinkled,  Heb.  x.  22.  These 
words  for  washing  are  such  as  are  the  most  usual 
for  the   ordinary  ways   of  washing  :  the   same,   for 

'  aqua.'     Not.  Misc.  c.  9.      [See  Nota  Miscellaneee,  being  an  Ap- 
pendix to  his  Porta  Mosis,  4to.  Oxoniae,  1655,  especially  p.  365.] 
^  This  was  not  dipping.      '  Lavantes  a  foro  totum  corpus  non 
'  mersabant.'     Pocock,  Not.  Misc.  c.  9. 


Concerning  Separation,  Immersion.  331 

example,  with  that  which  is  used,  Acts  xvi.  83.  He  chap. 

•  VIII 

tvashed  their  stripes.     No  man  will  think  they  were L. 


put  into  water  for  that.  Y'''""  ''*^'**^' 

1  the  apo- 

They  had  several  words  to  signify  washing.  And  sties. 
tjjey  used  them  promiscuously  for  the  sacramental 
washing,  and  for  other  washings.  It  is  the  Christ- 
ians since,  that  have  ap[)ropriated  the  word  baptize 
to  the  sacramental  washing :  much  after  the  same 
rate  as  they  have  appropriated  the  word  Bible, 
which  in  Greek  is  any  book,  to  the  book  of  God  ; 
or  the  word  Scripture,  which  in  the  Scripture  itself 
signifies  any  writing,  to  the  Divine  writings. 

I  did  not,  in  the  first,  nor  second  edition,  proceed 
to  give  any  instances  out  of  any  other  book  beside 
the  Scripture,  of  the  word  (Ba-Trri^w,  used  for  washing 
by  perfusion  :  partly  because  it  does  not  belong  to 
the  main  matter  of  my  book,  which  is  a  history, 
not  of  the  manner  of  administering  baptism,  but  of 
the  subjects  of  it ;  infants,  or  adult  only.  And 
partly,  because  I  had,  as  for  other  authors,  referred 
the  reader  to  Mr.  Walker's  Doctrine  of  Baj)tisms ; 
where  there  are  a  great  many.  But  yet  having 
lately  met  with  a  very  plain  instance  of  that  use  of 
the  word  in  Origen,  which  I  think  is  not  among 
Mr.  Walker's ;  I  will  give  it  to  the  reader.  It  is 
in  his  Comment,  in  Joann.  tom.  vii.  p.  116.  Ed. 
Rothom.  1668^. 

He  is  there  examining  the  ground  of  that  up- 
braiding demand  made  by  the  Pharisees  to  St.  John  ; 
why  he  baptized,  if  he  were  not  the  Christ,  nor 
Elias,  nor  that  prophet ;  and  says,  that  they  had  no 
reason  to  think  that  either  the  Christ,  or  Elias,  when 

c  [Comment,  tom.  vi.  sect.  J  3.  apud  edit.  Benedictin.  Op. 
vol.  iv.  pag.  125.] 


33^  Baptizing  naked. 

CHAP,  they    came,   would    baptize    in   their    own    persons. 

VIII.  *  . 
L_  And   accordingly  that  Jesus   (who  was   the  Christ, 

^1^0^-^'   and  that  prophet)  did  not  baptize  in  his  own  j^erson, 

sties.  |)nt    his    disciples.     And    concerning    Klias,    speaks 

thus  to  the  Pharisees  : 

\\6Qev  oe  vjjlIv  TreirlaTevTai  'IlXmi/  ^airTia-eiv  tov 
eXevaojuevov  \  ovoe  tu  ctt]  ra  tov  OvcriacrTripiov  ^JXa, 
Kara  tov?  tov  'A^aa/3  y^poiovg,  Seoimeva  XovTpov,  %a 
eKKavQrj,  eirKpavevTog   eu   Trvpl   tov  K^vpiov,  ^uTrTia-arrog  ; 

eTTiKeXeveTai  yap  TOt?   lepevcri    tovto    Troirjo-ai,  &C. o 

TOLVVv  lut]  avTO?  ^aTTTLcras  TOTe,  aXX'  eTtpoi?  tov  epyou 
Trapa-^copt'jo-ag,  ttco?  kutu  tu  vtto  tov  ^laXay^iov  Xeyo/ueva 
e7ncr]iu.ijG-a?  (3a7rTi^eiv  e/meXXe  ', 

'  How  come  you  to  think  that  Elias,  when  he 
'  should  come,  would  baptize ;  who  did  not  in 
'  Ahab's  time  baj^tize  the  wood  upon  the  altar, 
'  which  was  to  be  washed  before  it  was  burnt  by 
'the  Lord's  appearing  in  fire?  But  he  orders  the 
'  priests  to  do  that ;  not  once  only,  but  says,  Do 
'  it  the  second  time ;  and  they  did  it  the  second 
'  time :  and.  Do  it  the  third  time ;  and  they  did  it 
'  the  third  time.  He  therefore  that  did  not  himself 
*  baptize  then,  but  assigned  that  work  to  others, 
'  how  was  he  likely  to  baptize,  when  he,  according 
'  to  Malachy's  prophecy,  should  come?' 

Tn  the  text,  1  Kings  xviii.  33,  the  order  given  by 
Elijah  is ;  Fill  four  barrels  ivith  water ;  and  pour 
it  on  the  burnt  sacrifice,  and  on  the  ivood.  And  he 
said.  Do  it  the  second  time,  &c. 

This  Origen  calls  the  baptizing  of  the  wood. 

But  to  proceed  with  the  tenets  of  the  antipaedo- 
'  baptists  of  England. 

3.  As  exact  as  the  antipa^dobaptists  are  in  imi- 
tating the  primitive  way  used  in  the  hot  countries, 


The  Form  of  Baptism.  333 

they  do   not    baptize    naked:    which   those   ancient  chap 
Cliristians  always  did,   when   they  baptized   by  im- 


mersion; as  I  shew  in  the  next  chapter.  They  ^j^^^^^p^J^"' 
usually  spoke  of  the  putting  off  the  body  of  the  sins^^^^^' 
of  the  flesh,  as  a  thing  signified  by  the  unclothing 
of  the  person  to  be  baptized.  I  suppose  it  is  for 
preserving  modesty,  that  they  dispense  with  that 
custom.  So  it  seems  in  some  cases  they  can  allow 
of  dispensing  with  the  primitive  custom. 

4.  But  a  more  material  thing,  in  which  some  of 
them  do  deviate  both  frouj  the  express  command  of 
our  Saviour,  and  the  received  practice  of  the  church, 
is  in  the  form  of  baptism.    One  sort  of  them  do  count 
it  indifferent  whether  they  baptize  with  these  words ; 
In  the  tianie   of  the  Father,  and  of  the  Son,  and  of 
the   Holy  Spirit:  or    with  these;  In   the   name    of 
the  Lord  Jesus.     And  do  in  their  public  confession  ^ 
allow  either  of  the  forms.     And  I  have  heard  that 
some  of  them  do  affectedly  choose  the  latter.     But 
I  am  told,  by  one  who  should  know  «,  that  whatever 
has  been   done   formerly,  they  that   do  so   now  are 
very  few ;  and  those,  men  not   well  thought   of  by 
the  general  body  of  them,  but  only  such  as  are  sus- 
pected to   be   underhand   Socinians  ;  for  they  have 
many  such  among  them :  and   it   is  not  for  the  use 
of  those  that  have  a  mind  to  obliterate  the  belief  of 
the  Trinity,  to  baptize  their  proselytes  into  the  faith 
and  name  of  it.     I  believe  one  reason  why  Socinus 
had  such  a  mind  to  abolish  all  use  of  baptism  among 
his   followers,  was  because   persons  baptized  in  the 
name   of  the   Father,   and   the   Son,  and  the  Holy 
Spirit,  would  be  always  apt  to  think  those  names 

d  Confession  of  the  Anabaptists,  reprinted,  Lend.  1691. 
•"  [Mr.  Stennet.     See  Wall's  Defence,  chap,  vi.] 


334  The  Form  of  Baptism. 

CHAP,  to  express  the  Deity  in  wliieh  they  were  to  believe  : 

"•     which  he  did  not  mean  they  should  do.     And  some 

Year  after  of  liis  followei's  liavo  been   so   dissfusted  with  that 

tiie  apo-  _  ^° 

sties.  form  of  baptism,  that  they  have  given  profane  insi- 

nuations ^  that  those  words  were  not  originally  in 
the  Scripture,  but  were  taken  from  the  usual  dox- 
ology  into  the  form  of  baptism,  and  then  inserted 
into  the  text  of  Matt,  xxviii.  19. 

Those  that  baptize  only  in  the  name  of  the  Lord 
Jesus  plead  the  examples  of  the  apostles.  Acts  viii. 
16.  Item  xix.  5.  But  though  in  those  passages, 
where  the  matters  of  fact  are  related  in  short,  there 
be  mentioned  in  the  recital  only  the  name  of  the 
Lord  Jesus,  because  that  was  the  name  that  the 
apostles  found  it  most  difficult  to  persuade  the  Jews 
to  own,  (they  having  already,  as  St.  Cyprian  says  s, 
the  ancient  baptism  of  Moses  and  of  the  law,  were 
now  to  be  baptized  in  the  name  of  Jesus  Christ,)  yet 
interpreters  have  taken  it  for  granted,  that  in  the 
conferring  those  baptisms  the  apostles  used  the 
whole  form  which  our  Saviour  had  prescribed. 
Origen  in  Rom.  vi.  Didymus,  lib.  ii.  de  Spiritu 
Sancto.  Cyprian.  Epist.  ad  Jubaianum.  Augustinus 
passim.  Canon  Apostol.  41^  42.  aliis  49,  50.  And 
Athanasius  says  ^',  '  He  that  is  baptized  only  in  the 
'  name  of  the  Father,  or  only  in  the  name  of  the 
'  Son,  or  without  the  Holy  Spirit,  &;c.,  receives  no- 
'  thing.'  In  short,  it  is  true  which  St.  Austin  says  '\ 
that  '  in  Church-History  you  shall  oftener  meet  with 
'  heretics  that  do  not   baptize  at  all,  than  with  any 


f  The  Judgment  of  the  Fathers,  &c.  part  i.  p.  22. 

g  Epist.  ad  Jubaianum.  li  Epist.  ad  Serapionem. 

'  Lib.  vi.  contra  Donatistas,  cap.  25. 


The  Origin  of  tlie  Flesh  of  Christ.  ?,%^ 

*  that  do   baptize  with   any  other  words,'  viz.  than   chap. 
those  of  the  Father,  Son,  and  Holy  Spirit.  ^^^^' 

Yet  we  do   find  one  sort  of  heretics  that  did  so.  Y*'^''  ^^'^"^ 

the  apo- 

It  was  one  sect  of  the  Eunomians,   Avho,   Sozomen  ^^'^s. 
says  \  were  the  first  that  ever  did  it.     And  he  gives  ^^^* 
his  opinion  that  they  are   in  as   ill   case  as   if  they 
were  not  baptized  at  all. 

5.  Some  other  singular  opinions  they  hold,  that 
do  not  at  all  relate  to  baptism.  Some  of  them  (but 
I  think  it  is  but  few  in  England)  do  hold  that  error 
which  has  of  old  been  attributed  to  the  antipredo- 
baptists  of  Germany,  and  is  said  to  be  still  held  by 
the  Minnists  of  Holland,  that  Christ  took  not  flesh 
of  the  Virgin  Mary,  but  had  it  from  heaven  ;  and 
only  passed  through  her,  as  water  through  a  pipe, 
without  receiving  any  of  his  human  substance  from 
her.  The  Belgic  confession  ^  calls  this  the  '  heresy 
'  of  the  anabaptists.' 

It   is   strange   to  observe  in   how  many  heresies, 
old  and   new,  this   odd  opinion,  so  plainly  contrary 
to  Scripture,  has  made  an  ingredient.     It  was  first  20. 
invented  by  the  Gnostics  and  Valentinians  ;  for  they 
explained   all    that  they  believed  of  our  Saviour's 
human   nature   in  this  manner ;  as  we  perceive  by 
Irenaeus  ™.    Also  by  TertuUian  "  we  understand  that 
beside  them  Marcion  and   Apelles  (that  was  one  of  40. 
his   followers)  held   the   same,  but  with  this  differ- 88. 
ence ;  Marcion  said   our  Saviour  had  no  real  flesh 

k  Eccles.  Hist.  vi.  cap.  26. 

1  Artie.  18.  [See  this  confession  in  the  '  Sylloge  Confessionum 
'  sub  tempus  reformandse  Ecclesise  editarum,'  8°.  Oxen.  1 804  ; 
again  1837.] 

Ki  Lib.  i.  cap.  i  circa  medium.     Item,  Ub.  iii.  cap.  17. 

1  De  Carne  Christi,  cap.  vi.  &c. 


336  Preexistmce  of  Chrisfs  Human  Soul. 

CHAP,  at   all,    but    only   in    appearance;    Apelles   owned 
real  flesh,  but  not  of  human  race ;  but  made  of  the 


thrap^i^*^^  substance  of  the  stars  and  heavenly  bodies,  which 

sties.         was  brought  into    the    Virgin's   body  only  to  pass 

through  her.     Athanasius  also  ascribes  this  opinion  ° 

no.  to  the    Marcionists.     Gennadius  p,  besides  that   he 

348.  also  names  Marcion,  says  that  Origen  and  Eutyches 

270,  taught  that  Christ's  flesh  was  brought  from  heaven. 

And  Gregory  Nazianzen,  in  an  epistle  to  Nectarius^, 

tells  him  that  he  had  met  with  a  book  of  Apollina- 

rius,  that  maintained  this  heretical  tenet,  '  that  in 

'  the  dispensation  of  the  incarnation  of  the  only  Son 

*  of  God,  he  did  not  take  flesh  from  without  to  re- 

'  pair  our  nature,  but  there  was  the  nature  of  flesh 

'  in  the  Son  of  God  from  all  eternity.'     But  I  hear 

that  Canisius '  has  found  and  published  an  epistle  of 

his,  wherein  he  disowns  it.     I  shewed  before  ®  that 

this  of  Christ's  flesh  only  passing  through  the  body 

1150.  of  the  Virgin,  made  one  of  the  monstrous  tenets  of 

220.  one  sort  of  the  Cathari,  spoken  of  by  Reinerius,  who 

were  Manichees  in  the  main.     The  old  Manichees 

held  that  he  had   properly  no  flesh   at  all,  that  he 

was  not  born  of  Mary,  but  came  from  the  lirst  man, 

which  first  man  was  not  of  this  earth. 

Most  of  the  old  heretics  that  taught  this,  did  it 
because  they  would  not  yield  that  our  Saviour  did 
really  condescend  so  far  as  to  take  on  him  human 
nature,  and  be  properly  a  man  made  (as  St.  Paul 
expresses  it)  of  a  woman :  so  they  made  use  of  it  to 

o  De  Salutari  Adventu  adv.  Apollinaristas. 

P  De  Eccles.  dogm.  cap.  2. 

q  Apud  Sozom.  Hist.  Eccl.  lib.  vi.  cap.  27. 

r  Antiquse  Lectionis,  torn.  v.  [40.  Ingolestadii,  1601,  &c.] 

s  Chap.  vii.  §.  4. 


Fnsexistence  of  Ckrisfs  Human  Soul.  337 

impugn    liis    humanity.      But    we    have    reason    to  chai* 
judge  that  most  that  hold  it  now,  do  it  to  impugn L 


his  divinity:  for  by  this  subterfuge,  that  his   flesh y^'' '**''^'" 

•'  •'  o    '  the  apo- 

was  sent  originally  from  heaven,  and  only  passed  sties, 
through  the  body  of  the  Virgin,  they  evade 
the  arguments  for  his  divinity  and  prseexistence, 
taken  from  those  places  of  scripture  which  speak 
of  his  coming  from  heaven,  coming  forth  from  the 
Father,  and  coming  into  the  world,  &c.,  expounding 
these  texts,  not  of  an  eternal  prseexistence,  but  of  his 
flesh  made  in  heaven  and  sent  down.  For  they 
do  not  understand  it,  as  Apollinarius  is  said  to 
have  done,  that  this  heavenly  flesh  was  from  eter- 
nity, but  made  at  a  certain  time  before  the  world, 
as  the  Arians  said  his  divine  nature  was. 

So  that  this  ojjinion,  as  well  as  the  former,  fits 
those  antipcedobaptists  best  that  are  inclined  to  So- 
cinianism.  But  what  then  will  these  men  make  at 
last  of  our  blessed  Saviour  ?  The  old  heretics,  some 
of  them  denied  him  to  be  God,  and  others  of  them 
denied  him  to  be  properly  man  :  but  these  deny 
both,  and  say  that  he  is  neither  God,  nor  jjroperly 
man  ;  as  not  being  made  of  a  woman,  nor  the  seed 
of  David.  Will  they  make  no  more  of  him  than 
the  '  Jesus  Christ  of  the  Quakers,'  many  of  whom 
speak  of  Jesus  Christ  as  being  nothing  else  but 
something  within  themselves,  a  notion  of  their 
brains  ?  But  there  are,  as  I  said,  few  of  the  English 
antipaedobaptists  that  hold  this :  some  foreign  ones, 
it  seems,  do. 

Whereas  Gennadius  imputes,  as  I  said,  this 
opinion  to  Origen;  I  did  suspect  it  (when  in  the 
first  edition  I  wrote  it  down)  to  be  Gennadius'  mis- 
take, (having  never  observed  any  saying  of  Origen 

WALL,  VOL.  II.  z 


338  Prcpexistence  of' Christ'' s  Human  Soul. 

CHAP,  tending  this  way,)  and  I  do  since  find  that  Huetius* 


VIII. 


has  proved  it  to  be  so.  He  must  have  mistaken  it 
tTrapo-'''  for  another,  which  Origen  did  indeed  hokl,  and 
sties.  which  is  in  the  consequence  so  near  akin  to  this, 

that  they  are  by  Athanasius  both  condemned  in  one 
sentence.  He  held  a  praeexistence  (not  of  Christ's 
flesh,  but)  of  his  human  soul. 

He  had  imbibed  from  Plato's  notions  a  fancy  that 
all  souls  were  created  at  the  beginning :  and  then 
he  thought  it  probable  that  in  that  praeexistent  state 
some  of  these  souls  behaved  themselves  better  than 
others,  and  so  were  put  into  better  bodies.  And 
then  (according  to  that  rambling  faculty  that  he  had 
of  building  castles  in  the  air,  one  on  the  top  of 
another)  he  imagined  that  there  might  be  some  one 
soul  among  these,  that  might  behave  itself  far  better 
than  any  of  the  rest,  and  so  might  be  chosen  by 
God  out  of  the  rest  to  be  assumed  by  the  X0709.  To 
which  sense  he  interprets  Psalm  xlv.  7.  making  it 
to  be  said  to  this  soul,  TJiou  hast  loved  righteous- 
ness, &c.  therefore  God^  even  thy  God,  hath 
anointed  thee  with  the  oil  of  gladness  above  thy 
fellows.  After  which  he  finds  out  a  great  many 
pieces  of  work  for  this  soul  to  do,  before  the  time 
that  it  was  united  to  the  body  that  was  born  of  the 
Virgin  Mary. 

The  Christians  of  those  elder  times  took  great 
oifence  at  his  thus  bringing  the  romantic  notions  of 
the  heathen  philosophers  and  the  fictions  of  his  own 
brain  into  the  most  sacred  points  of  the  Christian 
faith  ;  the  main  property  whereof  is,  that  it  be  kept 
whole,  undefiled,  unmixed,  and  unaltered,  and  (as 
Tertullian  says)  '  not  to  be  mended.'     And  when  his 

t  [See  Huetii  Origeniana,  lib.  ii.  cap.  2.  qusest.  6.  p.  92^  93.] 


P?-cee.nstence  of  Chrisfs  Human  Soul.  339 

tvorks    came    abroad   in    the  world,  there    was    for   thaf. 
several  ao^es  a  debate  among  the  churches,  whether L_ 


they  should  receive  his  books,  and  honour  his  me- V^'' '^*'^^'' 

•'  the  apo- 

mory,  as  of  a  catholic  Christian;  or  hold  both  in^"^'*^*- 
execration,  as  of  a  heretic.  And  though  the  admi- 
ration they  had  of  his  great  parts,  learning,  memory, 
pains,  &c.  (which  were  greater  than  had  been  in 
any  Christian  before,  or  perhaps  have  been  since,) 
and  their  love  to  the  piety  that  he  had  shewn  did 
much  prejudice  them  in  his  favour;  yet  because  of 
this  and  other  heterodox  tenets,  he  was  by  the 
greatest  part  condemned,  (such  a  zeal  the  Christians 
of  that  time  shewed  against  any  one  that  went 
about  to  bring  any  alteration  into  their  '  form  of 
•  sound  words,')  but  many  on  the  other  side  did 
attempt  apologies  for  him.  The  first  and  best  of 
which  is  that  which  was  drawn  up  by  Pam- 
philus^  the  martyr,  assisted  by  Eusebius,  in  six 
books. 

Some  of  his  tenets  these  apologists  do  endeavour 
to  justify  by  giving  a  qualifying  explication  of 
them  ;  and  some  that  were  imputed  to  him,  they 
shew  to  be  imputed  wrongfully.  But  this,  which  I 
have  been  speaking  of,  there  is  not  one  of  them  pre- 
tends to  justify :  but  yet  they  say  he  ought  not  to 
be  accounted  a  heretic,  because  he  did  not  affirm  it 
positively,  or  teach  it  dogmatically,  or  hold  it  ob- 
stinately ;  but  only  proposed  it  to  the  consideration 
of  the  hearers  or  readers,  whether  such  a  thing 
might  not  be.  So  Pamphilus  (after  he  had  en- 
deavoured to  refute  the  rest  of  the  accusations 
against  him  from  his  own  words)  when  he  comes  to 

'I  [See  what  remains  of  this  work,  in  the  Appendix  to  vol.  iv. 
of  the  Benedictine  edition  of  Origen's  works,  p.  17,  &c.] 

z  2 


340  Pra'existence  of  Christ's  Human  Soul. 

CHAP,   this  (which  is  the  eighth  of  the  nine  capital  errors 

^"^'     there  discussed)  says^ ;  '  I  must  make  answer  here 

Year  after  «  mvself.'     The   answer  he  makes  is,  '  that  Origen 

tlie  apo-  "^  o      ^  ^    •  1*1 

sties.  '  knowing  that  that  tenet  of  the  soul  is  not  plamly 
'  contained  in  the  doctrine  of  the  church,  did  (when- 
'  ever  some  words  of  Scripture  gave  him  occasion,  or 
'  a  hint  rather,  of  disputing  of  it,  and  he  did  discuss 
'  and  handle  what  seemed  probable  to  him  thereon) 
'  propose  his  thoughts  to  be  judged  of  and  approved 
'  by  the  readers,  not  defining  any  thing  as  a  plain 
'  [or  positive]  point  [dogma],  or  having  the  autho- 
'  rity  of  an  article  [sententia],  and  did  generally 
'  add  to  it  such  qualifying  words  as  these  ;  "  If  that 
'  account  which  I  give  of  the  soul  do  seem  to  any 
'  one  to  have  any  probability  in  it." '  And  that  he 
never  wrote  any  treatise  particularly  '  of  the  soul ;' 
(as  he  had  done  of  almost  every  thing  else,)  which 
Pamphilus  says,  is  a  sign  that  he  '  did  not  venture 
'  to  define  any  thing  dogmatically  about  it.' 

This  part  of  the  apology  is  true.  For  whereas 
there  are  but  two  places  in  his  works,  where  he  in- 
sists purposely  on  this  prseexistence  of  Christ's  soul ; 
one.  Contra  Celsum,  lib.  i.  the  other,  irepi  ap-)(p)v,  lib. 
ii.  ch.  6.  (in  other  places  he  only  touches  it  by  the 
by  :  In  the  first  of  these  he  (as  soon  as  he  begins  to 
talk  of  that  matter  of  the  praeexistence  of  souls, 
upon  which  it  is  that  he  proceeds  to  speak  of  Christ's 
soul)  admonishes  the  reader  tlmsy:  'I  speak  this 
'  according  to  the  notion  of  Pythagoras,  Plato,  and 
'  Empedocles,  whom  Celsus  often  quotes.'  And  in 
the  latter  of  them,  where  he  purposely  insists  on  the 

X  Pamphili  Apolog.  prope  finem.  [p.  43.  edit.  Benedict.] 
y  Contra  Celsum,  lib.  i.  p.  26.  ed.  Cant.  [Sect.  3a.  Op.  torn.  i. 
p.  351.  edit.  Benedictin.] 


Prceexistence  of  Christ's  Human  Soul.  341 

article  of  Christ's  incarnation,  he  first  confesses  it  to  chap. 
be  a  miracle  and   mystery,  which  it  is  beyond  the 


power  of  the  apostles,  or  even  of  the  highest  angels,  ^[^.''^^'  ***'"' 
to  explain :  but  yet  in  the  next  words  ventures  on  s'^''^^- 
the  explication  of  it,  (which  he  gives  to  the  purpose 
aforesaid,  of  a  soul  praeexisting  and  united  to  the 
Xoyo'f,  and  then  incarnated,)  but  premises  that  he 
will  not  define  rashly  [temeritate  aliqua],  but  pro- 
pose rather  his  own  guesses  [or  imaginations,  sus- 
piciones  nostras']  '  than  any  positive  affirmations.' 
He  does  not  say,  '  It  is  every  whit  as  clearly  re- 
'  vealed  as  any  article  of  faith  whatsoever;'  or,  '  No 

*  Christian  doctrine  is  more  clearly  delivered  than  is 

*  this  of  my  discourse,' 

These  excuses  did  alleviate,  but  not  quite  take  off^ 
the  scandal  taken  at  this  innovation  in  the  faith. 
When  a  man  in  his  station,  a  presbyter  of  the 
church,  does  vent  any  such  odd  and  singular  fancy 
in  religion ;  though  he  do  it  with  never  so  much 
caution  and  declaration,  that  he  is  not  positive  in  it, 
yet  it  always  does  some  hurt,  because  of  the  in- 
clination and  itch  that  people  have  to  catch  at  a 
newfangled  opinion :  and  it  cannot  be  so  absurd, 
but  that  it  will  meet  with  some  sorts  of  men,  or 
women  at  least,  whose  brains  stand  awry  in  that 
particular  enough  to  make  them  embrace  it.  It  is 
always  remembered  among  the  heads  of  accusation 
afterward  brought  against  him  :  and  in  that  solemn 
and  authoritative  denunciation  of  him  for  a  heretic 
given  out  by  Theophilus,  the  patriarch  of  Alexan- 
dria ^,  as  the  prseexistence  of  souls  in  general  makes 

z  Epist.  Paschal,  i.  [published  m  the  fourth  volume  of  the  Bene- 
dictine edition  of  St.  Jerome's  Works,  and  at  vol.  i.  p.  555,  of 
that  by  Vallarsius.] 


342  The  3IUlennium. 

CHAP,   the  first,  so  this  prseexistence  of  Christ's  soul  in  par- 

VIII 

ticular  makes  the  sixth  of  the  thirty-five  errors  there 

Ihea^o-^^  imputed  to  him.     And  the  patriarch  is  particularly 
sties.  enraged   at  his   perverting   the  sense   of  that  text, 

Philipp.  ii.  6,  7,  €K€V(jo(T€v  eavTov,  by  giving  a  new 
interpretation  of  it  adapted  to  his  new  hypothesis. 

I  believe  Theophilus  must  have  taken  this  from 
some  book  of  his  not  now  extant ;  for  he  never,  as 
I  remember,  misapplies  it  so  in  those  that  are.  He 
often  applies  that  text,  as  other  Christians  do,  to  the 
\6yo9.  I  will  give  an  instance  in  the  next  chapter, 
§.  10.  And  so  for  John  i.  10.  Col.  i.  15,  16.  He 
even  in  the  midst  of  his  dreams  did  never  dream 
of  a  man- creator. 

The  place  of  Athanasius,  where  he  condemns  in 
one  sentence,  as  I  said,  both  this  opinion  of  the 
human  soul,  and  the  other  of  the  flesh,  of  Christ 
prseexisting,  is  in  his  Epistle  to  Epictetus^:  Et/coVco? 

KaTayi'cocTOVTai  eavrwv  Trai/re?  oi  vofxtCovTe?  irpo  t>]9 
Mojo/a?  elvai  t>]U  e^  auT^9  (rapKa,  Kai  irpo  ravrrj^  Tiua 
^a-^riKevai  v^vs(r}v  avOpdoirlvriv  Tov  [0eo^]  Xoyof,  Ka\  eu  avTf] 
TTpo    tJ/?  eiriSijiLiia^  ae\    yeyevvtjaOai.      '  So  they   will  all 

'  condemn  themselves,  that  think  that  Christ's  flesh 
'  was  before  Mary  :  and  that  before  her  God  the 
*  Word  had  a  human  soul,  in  which  he  was  before 
^  his  coming  into  the  world.'  God  Almighty  preserve 
to  us  the  old  Christian  religion,  and  keep  us  in  the 
love  of  it,  and  deliver  us  from  all  new  ones,  and 
from  any  such  hankering  after  them  as  may  argue 
our  being  weary  of  the  old.  But  to  return  to  the 
tenets  of  the  English  antipaedobaptists. 

6.  Another  opinion  which  they  hold  more  gene- 

^  [See  Athanasii  Opera,    edit.  Benedictin.  2  torn,  folio,  Paris. 
1698.  torn.  i.  p.  907.  sect.  8.] 


Eating  of  Blood.     Sleep  of  Soul.  343 

rally,   is   the  millennary   opinion.     They  do,    many   chap. 
of  them,  take  that  prophecy,  Rev.  xx.  4,  5,  of  the 


souls   of  them   that   icere  beheaded  for    the    witness\^'^^ ^^^^^ 

•/  ■/  the  apo- 

of  Jesus,  &c.,  and  tuhich  had  not  icorshipped  ^/^e sties. 
beast,  &c.  living  and  reigning  with  Christ  a  thou- 
sand years,  in  a  proper  sense:  so  as  to  reckon 
that  the  saints  shall  rise  from  the  dead  one  thou- 
sand years  before  others  shall.  And  they  think  that 
Christ  will  then  come  down,  and  be  here  upon  the 
earth  (though  that  be  not  said  in  the  text)  for  that 
thousand  years :  and  then,  Satan  being  let  loose  to 
deceive  the  nations  for  some  time,  the  general 
resurrection  and  end  of  the  world  will  be. 

In  the  reciting  and  inculcating  this  doctrine  to 
other  people  that  are  not  of  their  way,  many  of 
them  are  apt,  instead  of  saying,  '  The  saints  shall 
*  rise  before  the  wicked,'  to  say,  '  We  shall  rise 
'  before  you^ 

7.  Another  thing,  which  almost  all  the  antipse- 
dobaptists  in  England  do  hold,  is,  that  that  decree  of 
the  apostles  at  Jerusalem,  mentioned  Acts  xv.  29, 
of  abstaining  from  blood  and  from  things  strangled, 
does  still  oblige  all  Christians.  So  they  will  eat 
of  no  such  thino-s. 

In  these  tM'o  last-mentioned  opinions  they  have 
many  of  the  most  ancient  catholic  Fathers  on  their 
side.  And  in  the  latter  of  the  two,  the  Greek 
church  has  all  along  been,  and  still  is  ^,  of  their 
opinion.  The  council  in  Trullo,  which  is  accounted 
a  general  one,  forbids  '  the  making  ^  of  the  blood  of 
'  any  animal  into  a  sauce.'     And  so  does  one  of  the 


^  Sir  Paul  Ricaut,  Hist,  of  Greek  Church,  chap.  xx. 
cCan.  67. 


344  Sleep  of  Soul.     Hades. 

CHAP.  '  canons  called  apostolic  forbid  '^  the  eating  of  blood, 
._ 1_  '  or  any  thing  strangled,  or  torn  by  beasts.' 

Ihel^t'  ^-  ^^^"^y  '^^'  "^'^"7  of  tl^e^'  (^"*^  iiot  all,)  hold  the 
sties.  opinion,  which  Calvin  in  a  treatise  on  purpose  '^  con- 
futes, as  held  by  the  German  antipsedobaptists,  and 
which  by  the  foregoing  account  is  said  to  be  still 
held  by  the  Minnists  of  Holland,  from  whom  our 
antipsedobaptists  must  have  had  it ;  that  the  soul 
sleeps,  or  is  senseless,  from  the  time  of  a  man's  death 
till  the  resurrection  of  his  body. 

This  opinion  is  very  wide  from  that  of  the  pri- 
mitive Christians;  yet  many  of  the  most  ancient 
of  them  held  an  opinion  that  is  middle  between  this 
and  that  which  is  now  commonly  held.  They  held, 
that  the  soul  at  death  goes  not  to  heaven,  (at  least 
none  but  martyrs'  souls,)  but  to  Jiades ;  and  that 
after  the  general  resurrection  the  soul  and  body 
united  again  are  received  to  heaven.  That  the 
souls  of  the  patriarchs  were  in  hades ;  and  that 
Christ's  soul  went  to  hades.  By  hades  they  mean 
the  general  receptacle,  or  state,  of  souls  good  and 
bad  till  the  resurrection  ;  save  that  some  few  of  them 
make  hades  the  place  of  the  bad,  and  Abraham's 
bosom  of  the  good ;  but  generally  they  speak  of 
Abraham's  bosom  as  one  part  of  hades.  So  that  it 
was  counted  a  place  or  state  quite  different  from 
heaven  and  from  hell ;  as  we  English  do  commonly 
now  understand  the  word  hell. 

It  is  great  pity  that  the  English  translators  of  the 
Creed  and  of  the  Bible  did  not  keep  the  word  hades 

dCan.  63. 

e  Psychopannychia,  [published  separately  in  80.  1558;  and  in 
vol.  vii.  of  the  Collection  of  Calvin's  Works,  folio,  Amsterdam, 
1671.] 


apo- 


Sleep  of  Soul.     Hades.  345 

ill  the  translation,  as  they  have  clone  some  orioinal  chap. 

VIII. 

words   which    had    no   English   word    answering    to 

them.  By  translating  it  hell,  and  the  English  having  ^i^g^""  ^^^ 
no  other  word  for  gehenna  (which  is  the  place '*'^^'^*- 
prepared  for  the  Devil  and  the  damned)  than  the 
same  word  hell  likewise ;  it  has  created  a  confusion 
in  the  understanding  of  English  readers.  We  say, 
Christ  descended  into  hell.  We  ought  to  mean 
hades  :  for  so  it  is  in  the  Greek,  Kare^t-i  ek  aSov. 
And  so  St.  Peter,  Acts  ii.  31,  His  soul  was  not  left, 
eh  aSov,  in  hades.  But  when  we  read  of  hell,  Matt. 
V.  20,  21,  29,  30,  and  such  other  places  where  the 
original  word  is  gehenna,  we  ought  to  understand 
the  hell  of  the  damned.  And  the  import  of  these 
two  words  in  the  original  differs  so  much,  that 
whereas  all  Christians  ever  believed  that  Christ 
descended  into  hades ;  yet  if  any  had  said,  he 
descended  into  gehenna,  he  would  have  been 
accounted  to  blas])heme.  And  yet  the  English 
expresses  both  by  the  same  word. 

To  give  an  account  at  once  of  all  the  places  in  the 
Bible  where  the  word  hell  is  used.  Where  we  read 
hell  in  these  texts  following,  it  is  in  the  original 
gehenna,  or  else  tartarus  ;  and  ought  to  be  under- 
stood, the  hell  of  the  damned.  Matt.  v.  22,  29,  30. 
X.  28  ;  Luke  xii.  5  ;  jMatt.  xviii.  8,  9 ;  Mark  ix. 
43 — 48  ;  Matt,  xxiii.  15,  33;  James  iii.  6;  2  Peter 
ii.  4.  But  where  we  read  hell  or  (jrai'e  in  these 
texts  following,  the  word  is  hades  ;  and  ought  to 
be  understood  only,  the  state  or  receptacle  of  de- 
parted souls  :  or,  in  some  of  them,  no  more  than  in 
general  a  state  of  dissolution.  Matt.  xxi.  23;  Luke 
X.  15 ;  Matt.  xvi.  18 ;  Luke  xvi.  23  ;  Acts  ii.  27, 
31 ;  1   Cor.   xv.   55,  where   it   is    translated   grave. 


346  Sleep  of  Souls.     Hades. 

CHAP.    Rev.  i.  18.  item  vi.  8.  item  xx.  13, 14.  And  in  the  Old 

VIII. 

Testament,  wherever  we  read  hell,  it  is  to  be  under- 


thrapo-*^'  stood  hades.  Jacob  and  David,  &c.,  whenever  they 
sties.  sjieak  of  their  dying,  call  it  their  going-  to  sheoly 
hades.  Which  words  our  English  translates  some- 
times hell,  sometimes  grave,  &c.  And  this  shews 
St.  Austin  s  observation  to  be  a  mistake  :  for  he  says^, 
that  infernum,  which  is  the  translation  of  hades  in 
many  places,  is  never  taken  in  Scripture  in  a  good 
sense,  or  as  the  fate  of  a  good  man. 

It  is  plain  that  Tertullian  took  it  otherwise,  by 
the  following  passages,  beside  many  other.  In  his 
book  de  Anima,  c.  vii.  he  speaks  of  the  different 
state  of  departed  souls,  receiving  either  '  torment  in 
'  fire,  or  comfort  in  Abraham's  bosom,  in  carcere  seu 
'  diver  sorio  infer  urn,  in  the  prison  or  receptacle  of 
'  Hades.'  And  in  his  book  de  Idololat.  ch.  xiii.  he 
speaks  of  Lazarus  being  '  apud  inferos  in  sinu 
'  Abrahse.'  Which  translated  into  Enolish  in  our 
common  way  of  speaking  would  be  ;  in  hell  in  Abra- 
ham's bosom.     It  must  be  translated  hades. 

Note,  that  in  all  the  texts  of  the  Revelation, 
death  and  hades,  OavaTo<i  koI  aStj^,  are  joined  together, 
and  that  at  the  general  resurrection  death  and  hades 
deliver  up  the  dead  that  are  in  them,  viz.  to  be 
tried  at  that  great  judgment;  and  then  death  and 
hades  are  cast  into  the  lake,  &c.  i.  e.  there  is  to  be 
no  more  death  nor  hades  ;  but  all  is  to  be  either 
heaven  or  hell,  i.  e.  an  eternal  and  unchangeable 
estate  of  woe  or  of  bliss. 

Beside  the  places  aforesaid,  several,  if  not  all,  of 
the  most  ancient  copies  of  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles 
liad  the  word  aSt]9,  in  ch.  ii.  24.     For  where  we  read, 

f  Epist.  99.  [Epist.  164.  sect.  7.  in  torn.  ii.  edit.  Benedictin.] 


Of  the  Htate  of  separate  Souls.  347 

Jiuving   loosed  the  pains  of  death;  for  it  ivas    not  chap. 
possible,  &c.  they  for  Oavarov  read  too  clSou,  the  pains 1_ 


of  hades.     So    reads    Irenaeus,  lib.  iii.  ch.  12.      gt.  \'^'"' ^^*^^' 

•^  the  apo- 

Austin,  Epist.  99,   and    other   places.     And    Poly-^ties. 
carp,  Epist.  ad  Philipp.  300. 

Now  the  ancients  did  not  think  that  the  state  of 
the  soul  in  hades  M'as  to  sleep,  or  be  senseless.  On 
the  contrary,  our  Saviour  in  the  parable,  Luke  xvi. 
22,  23,  represents  Dives  and  Lazarus  both  in  hades, 
(or  one  in  hades  and  one  in  Abraham's  bosom,  if  we 
take  Abraham's  bosom  as  out  of  hades,)  but  a  great 
way  off  from  one  another,  in  very  different  states ; 
neither  of  them  asleeji,  but  one  in  torment,  the  other 
in  repose.  And  all  the  ancients  do  instance  in  this 
parable  as  a  proof  that,  before  the  general  judgment, 
there  will  be  a  difference  made  between  the  state  of 
good  men's  souls,  and  those  of  wicked  men.  Tertul- 100. 
lian^  speaks  of  some  who  argued  that  there  will  be  no 
judgment  before  the  great  one,  when  the  soul  and 
body  shall  be  joined  ;  and  answers  them  ;  '  Quid  ergo 

*  fiet  in  tempore  isto  ?  Dormiemus  ?'  &c.  '  What 
'  then  shall  we  do  in  the  mean  time?  Shall  we  be 

*  asleep  ?  Souls  do  not  sleep,  not  even  ^vhen  they 

'  are  in  the  bodies,'  &c.     And   Eusebius'^    tells    of  120. 
some  heterodox  people  in  Arabia,  who  held  '  that 
'  the  soul  for   the   present  dies    together  with    the 

*  body,  and  is  raised  to  life  again  together  with  it.' 
He  says,  Origen  being  sent  thither  presently  con- 
vinced those  people. 

But  as  the  foresaid  Christians  of  these  ancient 
times  did  not  think  that  the  soul  sleeps ;  so  neither 
were  they,  generally  speaking,  of  the  opinion  that 
the  souls  of  dying  men  go  presently  to  heaven  or  to 

s  De  Anima,  cap.  ult.  l'  Hist.  Eccles.  lib.  vi.  c.  37. 


318  Of  ike  State  of  separate  Souls. 

CHAP,  gehenna.       I    shall,    for    brevity,    only    recite    what 
Justin  Martyr  and  Irengeus   do  say.     Justin  in  his 


th'^'^a^o"^'   •^^i'^logue'   speaking  of  some  heretics,  ol  Xeyova-i  fxr] 

sties.  ehai   avacTTacriv  veKpwv,    aXXa   a/na  tco   airoOvyja-Keiv,   Taq 

Yi/p^a?  avTwv   auaXaiulSdvea-Oai    elf  tov   ovpavov'.    /ur;  vtto- 

\dj3riTe  avrovs  l^pKTTiavov^.  *  Who  Say  there  is  no 
'  resurrection  of  the  dead ;  but  that  when  they  die, 
'  their  souls  are  taken  up  to  heaven  :'  adds,  '  Do  not 
'  take  these  men  for  Christians.'  And  Trenaeus  in 
like  manner  had  been  saying^,  that  most  of  the 
heretics  denied  the  resurrection  of  the  body ;  but 
held  instead  of  it,  that  when  they  died,  their  souls 
should  presently  fly  away  up  to  heaven ;  and  that 
some  erroneous  catholics  held  with  them  in  this  latter 
tenet,  though  not  in  the  former.  He  urges  against 
them  the  example  of  our  Saviour  ;  '  Who,'  says  he, 
'  observed  in  himself  the  law  of  dead  persons,  and  did 
'  not  presently  after  his  death  go  to  heaven,  but  stayed 
'  three  days  in  the  place  of  the  dead.'  It  is  plain  then, 
by  the  way,  that  he  took  that  paradise  where  the  thief 
was  to  be  that  day  with  our  Saviour,  to  be  not  pro- 
perly heaven,  but  a  station  in  hades.  Then  a  little 
after  he  argues  thus ;  '  Whenas  our  Lord  went  into 
'  the  midst  of  the  shadow  of  death,  where  the  souls  of 
'  deceased  persons  abode  ;  and  then  afterward  rose 
*  again  in  the  body,  and  was  after  his  resurrection 
'  taken  up  to  heaven  ;  it  is  plain  that  the  souls  of 
'  his  disciples,  for  whose  sake  the  Lord  did  these 
'  things,  shall  go  likewise  to  that  invisible  place  ap- 
'  pointed  to  them  by  God,  and  there  abide  till  the 
'  resurrection,  waiting    for    the    time    thereof;    and 

•  [Dialogus  cuin  Tryphone  Judseo,  8vo.  London,  1719  ;   and  in 
the  editions  of  his  Works,  fol.  1722.  and  174a.] 
^  Lib.  V.  cap.  3  i. 


Of  the  State  of  separate  Souls.  349 

*  afterward  receivinof  their  bodies,  and  risiiiir  aonin   chap. 
'  perfectly,  i.  e.   in    their  bodies,  as  our  Lord   did, 1_ 


*  shall  so  come  to  the  si«?ht  of  God.    For  the  dis-  Y^^'"  ^^'*^'' 

o  the  apo- 

'  ciple  is  not  above  his  master,  but  every  one  that  is^^^*^^- 
'  perfect  shall  be  as  his  master." 

'  As  therefore  our  IMaster  did  not  presently  fly 
'  up   to   heaven  ;  but  waiting   till   the   time   of  his 

*  resurrection    that   was    appointed    by  the   Father, 

*  which  had  been  foreshewn  by  Jonas  ;  and  rising 
'  the  third  day  was  so  taken  to  heaven :  so  we  must 
'  also  wait  the  time  of  our  resurrection  appointed 

*  by  God,  which  is  foretold  by  the  prophets ;  and  so, 

*  rising'  again,  be  taken  up,  so  many  of  us  as  the 
'  Lord  shall  account  worthy.' 

This,  as  might  be  shewn  by  many  more  quota- 
tions, was  the  most  general  opinion  of  those  times. 
It  is  true  indeed  that  some  Fathers  spoke  of  the 
soul  as  going  directly  to  heaven ;  and  that  this 
became  afterward  the  prevailing  opinion  in  the 
western  church;  which  is  also  affirmed  in  a  Homily' 
of  the  Church  of  England,  set  forth  in  the  time  of 
Queen  Elizabeth  :  so  that  it  seems  to  have  been 
the  general  opinion  of  the  protestants  in  England 
at  that  time.  But  before  the  making  of  that  homily, 
several  of  our  first  reformers  declared  against  it ;  as 
Tyndal  in  his  answer  to  sir  Thomas  More,  and  Frith 
in  his  answer  to  bishop  Fisher  "\  And  ever  since  the 
making  of  it,  there  have  been,  and  still  are,  some 
divines  of  great  note  and  station  in  that  church, 
who  do  plainly  enough  shew  their  sentiment  to  bo 
otherwise. 

1  Third  part  of  the  sermon  concerning  prayer. 

m   [See  the  works  of  Tyndal,  Frith,  and  Barnes,  folio,  London, 

I573-J 


350  Of  the  State  of  separate  Souls. 

CHAP.       The    reason    given    by   the    former,   viz.    Tyndal, 

Frith,  &c,,  were  to  this  purpose ;  that  the  placing- 

the^apo-^^  of  the  soul  in  heaven  does  destroy  the  arguments 
sties.  wherewith  Christ  and  St.  Paul  do  prove  the  resur- 

rection of  the  body.     As  when  our  Saviour  proves 
that  Abraham,  Isaac,  and  Jacob  shall  rise  again  in 
their  bodies;  because  God,  who  is  since  their  death 
called  in  Scripture  their  God,  is  not  the  God  of  the 
dead,  hut  of  the  living,  for  all  live  to  him  :  whereas, 
if  Abraham's   soul   had   been  then   in  heaven,  that 
had  been  no  proof  that  his  body  must  arise ;  for  God 
then  might  have  been  his  God,  though  his  body  had 
not  risen.     And  St.  Paul  proves  to  the  Corinthians 
the  resurrection,  because  else  the  Christians  would 
be  of  all  men  most  miserable,  as  having  hope  only 
in    this   life.     And   he   comforts    the   Thessalonians 
concerning    their   friends    departed,   not    by    saying 
that  they  were  gone  to  heaven,  but  that  they  should 
rise  again  at  the  last  day,  and   so  go   to   heaven. 
That  the  opinion  of  separate  souls  going  to  heaven 
was  the  invention  of  the  heathen  philosophers,  who 
knowing  nothing  of  the  resurrection,  did  so  salve  the 
hopes  of  a  future  state  ;  and  that  soriie  Christians 
(the  papists,  Tyndal  says)  had  confounded  and  mixed 
the   Christian   and   the   heathen    doctrine   together. 
And  again,  if  the   souls   be   in  heaven,  '  Tell  me,' 
says  Tyndal,  '  why  they  be  not  in  as  good  case  as 
'  the  angels  be  :  and  then  what  cause  is  there  of 
'  the  resurrection?'    All  this  while  these  men  would 
not  determine  in  what  state  the  separate  souls  really 
are:  but  Frith"  says,  '  I  dare  be  bold  to  say  that 
'  they  are  in  the  hand  of  God,  and  that  God  would 
'  that  we  should  be  ignorant  where  they  be,  and  not 
n   [Ibid,  page  55.] 


Of  the  Slate  of  separate  Souls.  351 

'  to  take  upon  us  to  determine  the  matter.'     And  chap. 
Tyndal  speaks  to  the  same  purpose,  and  adds  con- 


cerninff  the  souls  of  g-ood  men ;  *  I  believe  they  are  Y''''''"  ^^^^"^ 
'  in  no  worse  case  than  Christ's  soul  was  before  hisst'^s- 
*  resurrection.' 

To  these  reasons  the  later  divines,  of  whom  I 
spake,  do  add  ;  that  by  the  order  of  the  last  judg- 
ment, in  Matt.  xxv.  and  the  pleas  there  used,  and 
sentence  there  given,  it  should  seem  that  the  souls 
had  not  as  yet  been  sentenced  and  sent  either  to 
heaven  or  hell.  Come,  ye  Messed  of  my  Father, 
inherit  the  hingdom  prepared  for  you^  &c.  Depart 
from  me,  ye  cursed,  into  everlasting  fire,  &c.  For 
I  was  an  hungered,  &c.  Lord,  when  saw  ice  thee,  &c. 
And  then  afterward;  A7id  these  shall  go  away  into 
everlasting  punishment ;  but  the  righteous  into  life 
eternal,  &c.,  does  not  look  as  if  they  had  been  called 
out  of  heaven  and  hell  to  receive  a  sentence  to  go 
to  heaven  and  hell ;  but  that  they  had  been  till  this 
time  in  expectation  of  their  final  sentence.  Though 
the  souls  had  been,  (as  these  men  do  constantly  hold 
against  the  antipsedobaptists,)  the  bad  ones  in  some 
degree  of  torment  and  horror,  the  good  in  a  quiet 
repose  and  hopeful  expectation,  and  as  the  office  of 
burial  says,  '  in  joy  and  felicity.'  Or,  as  the  ancients 
express  it,  in  refrigerio. 

To  this  may  be  added  ;  that  whereas  the  general 
hypothesis  is,  that  the  souls  of  the  patriarchs  were 
taken  by  Christ  out  of  hades,  and  carried  up  with 
him  into  heaven  at  his  ascension  thither ;  St.  Peter, 
on  the  contrary,  preaching  after  Christ's  ascension, 
says  expressly.  Acts  ii.  34,  that  David  was  not  then 
ascended  to  heaven.     The  answer  to  which  (being, 


352  Oftlte  State  of  separate  SmiJs. 

CHAP.   I  sup])ose,  that  David  was  not  ascended  to  heaven 

VIII.      . 

in  body,  as  Christ  was,  but  his  soul  might  be  there) 


sties. 


tiirapo-'"  seems  inconsistent  with  St.  Peter's  reasoning  at  that 
place.  For  he  is  shewing  that  that  saying  of  David, 
Thou  wilt  not  leave  my  soul  in  hades,  could  not  be 
understood  of  David  himself,  who  was  both  dead 
and  buried,  and  his  sepulchre  then  extant ;  but  that 
David,  being  a  prophet,  and  seeing  this  before,  spake 
of  the  resurrection  of  Christ,  that  his  soul  was  not 
left  in  hades :  where  St.  Peter  seems  to  understand 
it,  that  David's  soul  was  in  hades  (as  well  as  his 
body  in  the  sepulchre)  to  that  day.  The  rest  of 
their  arguments  I  leave  to  be  seen  in  their  books. 

But  as  to  the  antipaedobaptists'  opinion  of  the 
sleep  of  the  soul ;  a  late  writer?  that  lives  in  a  part 
of  Kent  that  abounds  with  them,  ascribes  to  some 
of  them  an  opinion  much  worse  than  the  ordinary 
one  of  the  sleep  of  the  soul  till  the  resurrection. 
For  he  says,  some  of  that  sect  have  been  heard  to 
say,  (and  he  believes  it  is  the  private  tenet  of  others 
of  them,)  '  That  infants  dying  before  actual  sin, 
«  their  souls  consume  with  their  bodies ;  and  they 
'  die  never  to  be  any  more.  Therefore  they  forbear 
'  the  giving  of  baptism,  as  unnecessary  for  them.' 
I  hope  and  believe  that  this  can  be  the  opinion  of 
but  very  few,  and  those  some  ignorant  people, 
among  them.  And  I  am  lately  assured  by  a  man^ 
of  chief  note  among  them,  that  he  never  knew  any 
one  man  of  any  sort  of  them  that  held  this.  And 
indeed  since  our  Saviour  shewed  such  a  concern  and 
tender  regard  for  infants,  saying  withal,  Of  such  is 

P  Case  of  an  Infant  dying  unbaptized,  page  1 8. 
1   [Mr.  Stennet.     See  Defence,  page  170.] 


Singing.  353 

the  kingdom  of  heaven:  and  since  God  and  nature  chap. 

have  implanted  in   the   heart  of  all    pious    })arents 

such  an  earnest  desire  of  the  eternal  o-ood  of  their  Y^^*"'^'"" 

"  the  apo- 

infants :  it  is  an  unnatural  thought,  that  neither  sties, 
that  concern  of  our  Saviour,  nor  that  desire  of  godly 
parents,  shall  ever  have  any  satisfaction  in  the  case 
of  such  infants  as  die ;  but  that  one  must  despair 
of  them,  as  persons  that  will  be  lost  for  ever,  not- 
withstanding any  means  that  can  be  used  for  their 
salvation.  P.  S.  One  party  of  the  antipsedobaptists 
do  deny  any  sleep  of  the  soul.  And  I  have  it  from 
good  hands,  that  they  that  do  now  hold  it  are  but 
few  in  comparison,  and  such  as  are  accounted  of  the 
more  ignorant  sort. 

9.  Many  of  the  antipsedobaptists  in  England  are 
said  to  be  against  any  singing  of  Psalms  in  divine 
worship.  I  recited  before •",  out  of  Petrus  Clunia- 1040. 
censis,  that  the  Petrobrusians  held  that  'it  is  a 
'  mocking  of  God  to  sing  in  the  church.'  And  the 
Lyonists  said,  'it  is  a  hellish  noise.'  I  believe  the  "O'- 
disgust  taken  at  that  time  was  against  the  excessive 
regard  then  given  in  the  popish  churches  to  the 
sound  and  music,  which  hindered  the  attention  to 
the  sense  of  the  prayers.  But  to  condemn  all  sing- 
ing of  praise  to  God,  is  a  thing  too  contrary  to  the 
Scriptures  both  of  the  Old  and  New  Testament. 
Some  of  them  do  not  dislike  singing  in  general ;  but 
say  that  the  Psalms  of  David  are  not  so  proper  now, 
as  some  that  may  be  composed  on  purpose  for  the 
use  of  the  Christian  church.  And  some  others  of 
them  are  not  at  all  against  singing,  any  more  than 
other  Christians  are.     And  it  grows  of  late   to  be 

•■  Chap.  vii.  §.  5. 
WALL,  VOL.  II.  A  a 


354  The  Use  of  the  Lorcfs  Prayer. 

CHAP,   more  and  more  in  use  with  them.     Thoiisrh  many 

VIII  .  ,  ^  J 
of  them  formerly  have  scrupled  the  use  of  Psalms, 

Xra  o^'^"^  as  sung  by  the  whole  congTegation  jointly;  yet  of 

sties.         late  that  humour  is  in  great  degree  worn  off:  and 

the  practice  of  singing  David's  Psalms,  and  in  the 

way  that  other  people   do,   has  generally   obtained 

among  them. 

10.  The  same  may  be  said  of  the  use  of  the  Lord's 
Prayer.  Many  of  them  do,  out  of  an  odd  and  unac- 
countable humour,  reject  the  use  of  it.  But  though 
this  be  an  imputation  laid  by  some  people  on  the 
whole  body  of  them,  yet  I  know  that  some  of  them, 
and  believe  that  most  of  them  do  both  use  it,  and 
teach  their  children  to  use  it.  The  Petrobrusians, 
as  well  as  all  the  other  sorts  of  the  Waldenses, 
extolled  the  use  of  it. 

11.  So  for  extreme  unction  of  the  sick,  spoken 
of  James  v.  14,  15,  Mr.  Russen  of  Hythe  in  Kent, 
a  place  that  is  full  of  these  people,  says^;  'I  am 
'  sure  it  is  both  their  opinion  and  practice,  as  to 
'  some,  though  probably  all  do  not  use  it.' 

P.  S.  This  I  find  to  be  confessed  since  by  Mr; 
Steimet.  But  he  tells  me,  it  is  but  rarely  practised  : 
and  that  not  (as  the  papists  use  it)  only  or  chiefly 
in  cases  desperate ;  but  mostly  in  hopes  of  recovery, 
and  for  that  end. 

12.  Mr.  Russen  mentions  also*  a  way  of  mar- 
riage used  among  them,  not  according  to  the  use  of 
the  church  of  England,  and  so  of  doubtful  validity 
in  the  law  of  the  land.     And  he  says,  '  This  was 


s  [See  David  Russen's  Fundamentals  without  a   Foundation  ; 
or  a  true]  Picture  of  the  Anabaptists,  chap.  viii.  p.  6o. 
*  Ibid,  page  58. 


Lord's- Supper.     Semnth-Dai/  Sabbath.  355 

'  introduced  to  give  room  for  the  Jesuits  and  Romish   chap. 

'  priests  to  take  women  :  for  they  being  prohibited _. 

'  marriaofe,  and  accountino-  marriaoe  one  of  the  seven  }, *'^'' ^'^'"" 
'  sacraments,  durst  not  take  a  wife,  or  be  married  ^^^^^• 
'  after  the  manner  of  either  the  Romish  or  English 
*  church,  &c.  but  wouhl  take  women  in  the  con- 
'  gregations  of  anabaptists  or  Quakers.'  But  he 
(though  writing  against  them  something  angrily) 
confesses,  and  it  is  a  known  thing,  that  '  many  of 
'  them  are  married  at  our  churches :  but  more,'  he 
says,  '  in  their  private  assemblies.'  But  this,  all  of 
them,  that  I  can  speak  with,  deny  to  be  true  in 
matter  of  fact.  They  are  for  the  most  part  married 
in  the  church.  That  scruple  diminishes  among 
them. 

13.  Their  way  of  receiving  the  sacrament  of 
the  Lord's  Supper  is  in  a  posture  that  shews,  out- 
wardly at  least,  less  of  devotion  than  the  way  of 
most  other  Christians.  They  receive  it  sitting  at  a 
common  table,  and  (as  the  foresaid  writer  expresses 
it)  '  with  the  hat  on,  and  handing  the  elements  one 
'  to  another".' 

P.  S.  I  find  since  that  the  hat  on  is  denied  :  the 
sitting  confessed. 

14.  Some  of  them  are  Sabbatarians,  i.  e.  they 
hold  it  still  necessary,  even  for  the  Gentile  Chris- 
tians, to  keep  every  Saturday  as  a  Sabbath-day. 
One    Bampfield'',    a    man    of    note    among    them, 

11  Page  57. 

^  [See  a  work  entitled,  '  The  Judgement  of  Mr.  Francis  Bam- 
'  field  late  minister  of  Sherborne  in  Dorsetshire,  for  the  observa- 
'  tion  of  the  Jewish  or  seventh-day  Sabbath,  &c.  in  a  letter  to 
'  Mr.  Benn  of  Dorchester.  Together  with  Mr.  Benn's  sober  an- 
'  swer  to  the  same.'  1  ?.o.  London,  1672.     See  also   a  piece   of 

A  a  2 


356  Laying  on  of  Hands. 

CHAP,   formerly  wrote  a  treatise  on  that  subject,  wherein  he 

'__  has,  they  say,  said  more  for  it  than  one  could  ima- 

Year  after  „-y^Q  couM  be  Said  for  SO  lieterodox  a  tenet.     There 

the  apo-        ~ 

sties.  are  however  in  the  country  few   or   none    of  this 

opinion  ;  what  are,  are  at  London.  Whether  the 
same  men  do  keep  the  Lord's-day  too,  I  know  not. 

15.  They  differ  more  among  themselves  about 
the  practice  of  Confirmation,  or  laying  on  of  hands 
after  baptism.  Some  of  them  do  wholly  omit  and 
reject  the  use  of  that  ordinance,  as  being  popish,  or 
having  no  foundation  in  Scripture,  or  at  least  not 
now  to  be  continued.  And  this  it  seems  was  the 
way  of  those  churches  or  societies  of  them,  that  in 
•544-  the  times  I  spoke  of,  did  first  openly  set  up  at  Lon- 
don. Others  of  them  account  it  a  necessary  thing. 
And  some  of  these  latter  making  it  an  order  among 
themselves,  as  the  church  of  England  does,  that 
none  shall  be  admitted  to  the  holy  communion, 
until  such  times  as  he  be  confirmed,  (the  church 
of  England  adds,  '  or  be  ready  and  desirous  to  be 
'  confirmed,')  there  necessarily  follows  a  breach  of 
communion  between  the  two  parties.  And  there- 
fore Danvers^  says,  '  must  not  all  those  churches  of 
'  that  constitution  (which  require  this  ordinance) 
'  necessarily  be  supposed  to  be  founded  in  sin  and 
'  schism,  as  well  as  in  great  error  and  ignorance  ?' 
He  says,  '  It  doth  not  appear  that  any  baptized 
*  church  or  people  did  ever  in  any  age  or  country 

]\Ir,  Thomas  Bampfield,  '  on  the  Sabhath,'  printed  for  the  author, 
1692  :  'Dr. WalUs'  Defence  of  the  Christian  Sabbath  in  answer 
'  to  the  foregoing  treatise,'  40.  Oxford,  1692  :  and  Thomas 
Bampfield's  '  Reply  to  Dr.  Wallis,'  4*^.  London,  1693. 

>  Treatise  of  Laying  on  of  Hands,  Conclusion,  [page  59.  57  : 
This  piece  is  subjoined  to  his  Treatise  of  Baptism,  8".  1674.] 


Laying  on  of  Hands.  357 

*  own  such  a  principle  or  practice  to  this  day,  except  chap. 
'  some  in   this    nation    in  these    late   times.'     And     ^"^' 


ffives  this  account  of  the  rise  of  it ;  '  That  about  the^^"''^^**^*" 

the  apo- 

'  year  1646,  one  Mr.  Cornwell,  heretofore  a  public  **''''«. 
'  preacher,  then  a  member  and  minister  of  a  bap-'^"^' 
'  tized  congregation  in  Kent, — coming  into  that 
'  baptized  congregation  then  meeting  in  the  Sj)ittle, 
'  Bishopsgate-street,  London,  preached  the  necessity 
'  of  laying  on  of  hands ;  inferring  from  thence  that 
'  those  who  were  not  under  laying  on  of  hands, 
'  were  not  babes  in  Christ,  &c.  Whereupon  several 
'  were  persuaded,  &c.  and  made  a  rent  and  a  separa- 
*  tion : — and  from  that  very  schism  propagated  the 
'  same  principle  and  practice  among  many  others  in 
'  the  nation  ever  since.'  But  this  account  of  Dan- 
vers  is  looked  on  by  the  moderate  men  that  are 
now  among  them,  to  be  no  just  one.  They  say, 
that  the  most  of  those  that  do  now  use  confirmation, 
admit  to  the  communion  and  receive  as  brethren 
those  that  scruple  the  using  it ;  and  e  contra. 

16.  As  to  the  point  of  prsedestination  :  those  of 
them  that  are  of  the  Arminian  opinion,  they  call 
the  general  men ;  as  holding  a  general  and  universal 
redemption  by  Christ :  and  the  Calvinists  they  call 
the  jMrticular  men,  as  holding  a  particular  and  ab- 
solute redemption  of  some  particular  persons. 

I  had  said  in  my  first  edition,  that  they  generally 
made  a  different  opinion  about  this  to  be  a  bar 
against  communion  one  with  another.  Some  of 
them  do  tell  me,  that  this  is  not  general ;  but  only 
the  temper  of  some  hot  and  eager  spirits  on  both 
sides :  that  the  country  where  I  dwell,  is  full  of 
such  of  them  as  are  of  the  least  repute ;  but  that 
the    major   part  of  their    elders   or  rulers   all  over 


358  Prctdesfination. 

CHAP.  England  do  now  admit  either  sort.     I   am  dad  if 

VIII. 

this  last  be  in  fact  the  truer  account  of  the  gene- 

iTlpo'f'  i"ality  of  them  :  for  (as  I  said  then)  if  the  church  of 
sties.  Christ  be  never  to   be   one,    till    all    Christians  do 

explain  themselves  alike  in  the  nice  disputes  that 
happen  in  reconciling  God's  prsescience  and  prsedesti- 
nation  with  man's  freewill :  it  will  never  be  one  in 
this  world.  All  protestants  that  make  divisions  on 
this  account,  should  learn  wit  from  our  common 
enemies.  They,  though  they  do  in  their  books 
carry  this  dispute  to  the  height,  yet  do  keep  them- 
selves from  separation  for  it :  in  which  practice 
they  are,  both  in  point  of  interest  and  of  duty, 
certainly  in  the  right. 

The  antipaedobaptists  may  be  sure  I  am  not  their 
enemy,  when  I  note  this  their  humour  of  dividing 
from  one  another,  as  an  imprudent  thing.  For  as 
it  is  the  interest  of  the  great  enemy  of  mankind  that 
Christians  should  be  divided  as  much  as  is  possible ; 
and  of  the  papists,  that  protestants  should  be  so : 
so  whoever  were  an  enemy  to  these  men  in  particu- 
lar, would  wish  to  see  ten  parties  or  divisions  for 
every  one  that  is  among  them. 

17.  Many  (but  it  seems  not  all)  of  the  general 
men  are  Pelagians  in  the  point  of  original  sin. 
They  own  nothing  of  it.  The  other  do  :  as  appears 
both  by  the  '  confession  of  faith'  ^  of  seven  churches 
of  them,  which  I  mentioned  before ;  and  also  by 
their  jDresent  profession.  Some  of  the  general  men 
say,  they  Avonder  how  these  that  own  sin  in  infants 
can  be  against  their  baptism.  The  Pelagians,  that 
owned  no  sin  in  infants,  yet  granted  the  necessity 
of  their  baptism  to  obtain  the  kingdom  of  heaven  ; 

z  Art.  4,  5,  21,  &c. 


Original  Sin.  359 

these   believe  they    have   sin,  yet   they  deny  them  chap. 
ba])tism  for  the  forgiveness  of  it. 


18.  Socinians  they  have  some  that  creep  in  among  J^^^.^^*®'" 
them:  but  I  have  not  heard  of  any  church  or  con-^^'*^^- 
gregation  of  them  that  makes  profession  of  that 
doctrine  ;  but,  on  the  contrary,  that  they  that  profess 
it  openly  are  rejected  from  their  communion.  And 
as  much  as  I  have  said  against  their  divisions,  I  do 
not  see  how  they  that  worship  and  believe  in  Christ 
as  God,  can  join  with  them  that  either  renounce  the 
worship  of  him,  or  believe  him  to  be  only  a  creature 
lately  made,  and  even  still  to  be,  in  the  best  nature 
that  he  has,  of  finite  worth,  dignity,  and  capacity. 

A  late  confession,  published  in  the  name  of  one 
hundred  churches  of  them,  shews  those  churches  to 
be  catholic  as  to  the  faith  of  the  Trinity.  But  yet 
some  printed  papers,  of  much  the  same  date  with 
that  confession,  passing  between  some  of  their  con- 
gregations, do  shew  that  there  are  great  scandals 
given  or  taken,  by  some  of  them  against  others  on 
account  of  Socinian  tenets.  There  are  some  of  these 
papers  signed  by  several  of  their  messengers,  elders, 
and  representatives,  and  printed  1699,  renouncing 
that  assembly  of  antipsedobaptists,  which  they  call 
the  General  Assembly,  held  at  Gos well-street,  Lon- 
don, and  persuading  others  to  do  the  like  ;  saying, 
that  it  is  to  the  reproach  of  Jesus  Christ  and  the 
pollution  of  the  churches  to  hold  communion  with 
that  assembly  :  and  that  it  is  inconsistent  for  any 
who  hold  the  divinity  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ  to 
do  so. 

But  all  this  is  not  (as  far  as  I  can  learn)  that 
they  charge  the  General  Assembly  with  Socinian 
tenets;   but   only   with  refusing   to   turn    out  some 


360  Pelagianism. 

:hap.  that  are  accused  of  holding  them:  which  accusations 

VIII. 

they  think  to   be   fully  proved  ;  but   the   others,  it 


Ihel^t'  «eems,  say  they  are  not. 
sties.  Since  my  first  edition,  there  is  printed  in   1706, 

a  Socinian  pamphlet,  entitled,  '  The  Unreasonable- 
'  ness  of  making  and  imposing  Creeds.'  It  is  without 
a  name ;  but  the  author  seems  to  be  an  antipaedo- 
baptist,  that  is  angry  with  two  parties  of  his  bre- 
thren, one  called,  the  General  Assembly,  the  other, 
the  General  Association.  Which,  as  he  represents, 
having  been  at  some  variance,  did  on  June  9,  1704, 
unite  on  the  following  terms : 

First,  they  set  down  two  articles  of  faith  concern- 
ing God  the  Father  and  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ ; 
containing  an  orthodox  confession  of  the  Trinity, 
and  being  much  of  the  same  sense  as  are  the  first 
two  of  the  Thirty-nine  Articles  of  the  Church  of 
England.  [This  he  calls  a  specimen  of  modern 
creed-making.^ 

Then  they  enact,  that  if  any  of  their  members 
shall  publish  or  say  any  thing  contrary  to  that 
faith,  he  shall  be  '  esteemed  disorderlv,  and  dealt 
*  with  accordingly.'  But  they  add,  that  if  any  mem- 
ber receiving  this  faith,  shall  reflect  on  any  member 
that  does  not  receive  it  (provided  he  do  not  teach 
the  contrary),  he  also  '  shall  be  esteemed  disorderly, 
'  and  dealt  with  accordingly.' 

And  on  these  terms,  '  that  the  Assembly  and  As- 
'  sociation  do  presently  meet  together  as  formerly, 
'  and  unite.'  And  they  enact,  '  that  all  papers  that 
'  have  been  published,  relating  to  any  difference  be- 
'  tween  them,  be  suppressed.'  I  suppose  they  had 
in  their  eye  the  papers  that  I  spoke  of 

Upon  which  this  author  observes,  that  '  they  that 


Socinianism.  361 

'  have   not    throats    wide    enough    to    swallow  this   chap. 

7  VIII. 

*  rough  creed,  must  not  tell  their  reason  why.  But 


*  if  they  will  hold  their  tongues  and  only  think,  they  ^-^^l^lT 

*  shall  have  the  favour  not  to  be  reflected  on.'  Upon^''^'*- 
which  he  falls  into  a  vein  of  the  vilest  raillery,  bur- 
lesque, buffoonery,  and  mockery  of  the  doctrine  of 
the  Trinity,  that  this  impious  age  has  produced. 
And  it  has  produced  a  great  deal ;  too  much  in  all 
conscience  to  be  borne  with.  That  Socinian  doctrine 
seems  to  have  infected  all  its  disciples  (this  antipae- 
dobaptist  as  well  as  the  paedobaptist  ones)  with 
such  a  degree  of  searedness,  that  they  do  no  longer 
discourse  in  any  serious  way ;  but,  as  if  they  were 
talking  of  some  play  or  jest,  make  themselves  sport 
with  the  awful  mystery  of  God  the  Father,  the 
Son,  and  the  Holy  Spirit.  And  since  they  cannot 
argue,  would  laugh  us  out  of  our  faith.  One  would 
think  that  if  their  consciences  urge  them  to  argue 
against  the  God  of  the  Christians,  they  should  in  a 
Christian  nation  be  compelled  to  do  it  with  less 
effrontery  and  impudence. 

These  antipiedobaptists,  as  he  tells  us  afterward, 
met  again  in  1705,  and  agreed  that  none  should  be 
a  member  of  the  '  General  Assembly,'  (which,  it 
seems,  is  a  body  made  up  of  the  representatives  of 
particular  churches,)   '  unless   he   do    subscribe   the 

*  whole  of  the  foresaid  draught  of  1704.'  So  that  no 
Socinian  can  be  chosen  a  representative  [or  proctor] 
to  sit  in  the  General  Assembly  :  for  which  he  is 
very  angry  with  them,  though  all  the  world  beside 
must  think  it  but  a  necessary  caution. 

At  last,  he  tells  them  in  a  laughing  way,  that  '  to 

*  make  any  canons  without  the  queen's  license,  is  a 
'  praemunire.'     Which  is,  I  suppose,  brought  in  to 


362  Socinianism. 

CHAP,   insult,  and  triumph  over,  the   Convocation   of  the 

church   of  England,   for  its    being    under   such   re- 

tiirap^o^*^'  straint :  whereas  these  bodies   of  men   do   in  their 

sties.         assemblies  make   and  publish   any  rules   that    they 

think   needful  on   any  emergent   occasion ;    and  do 

actually  inflict  and  execute  their  church  censures  on 

such  of  their  members  as  do  not  observe  them. 

19.  They  are  generally  much  inclined  to  hold 
public  disputations  about  religion  before  the  multi- 
tude. Having  plain  places  of  Scripture  to  produce 
concerning  adult-baptism,  and  several  examples  of 
it ;  they  work  much  on  such  of  the  people  as  had 
not  minded  this  before,  and  had  not  had  a  right 
state  of  the  question  between  the  p^dobaptists  and 
the  antipaedobaptists  :  wherein  the  former  grant 
that  in  a  nation  newly  converted  to  Christianity, 
(and  such  are  all  the  cases  mentioned  in  the  Scrip- 
ture,) the  adult  people  must  be  baptized  first,  before 
their  infants  can  be  baptized. 

Their  most  eager  disputes  are  against  the  Quakers. 
And  they  have  reason.  For  since  so  great  a  part  of 
their  zeal  is  spent  in  setting  the  time  and  manner 
of  baptism  right,  as  they  judge  :  and  it  happens 
among  them  (as  indeed  the  like  does  among  all 
parties)  that  there  are  some  that  have  little  religion 
beside  their  zeal  in  that  matter :  the  Quaker  gives 
them  the  foulest  aifront  possible.  He  cuts  off  all 
their  religion  at  one  stroke ;  saying  that  all  water- 
baptism,  at  what  age  soever  it  be  given,  is  an  useless 
thing :  and  ])erverts  all  the  places  of  Scripture  where 
it  is  spoken  of,  with  some  farfetched  interpreta- 
tions ;  as  he  does  likewise  in  the  case  of  the  other 
sacrament.  And  though  among  peoj^le  of  sense  that 
do   own    the   Scripture,   (as    some    at   least    of   the 


Quakeristn.  365 

Quakers  do,)   one    would   think    that   this   dispute  chap. 

should  quickly  be  at   an  end ;  yet  it  is  strange  to 1_ 

observe  what  numbers  there  do  continue  in   many  V^^'"  ^*^*'^'" 

•I  the  apo- 

places   of  England  of  that  enthusiastical  sect,  that^ties. 
can   turn   the    plainest    places   of  Scripture    into    a 
riddle. 

It  is  a  great  discredit  to  the  climate  and  air  of 
England,  that  that  sort  of  distemper  of  brain  that 
disposes  men  to  Quakerism,  should  be  nowhere  so 
epidemical  as  there.  The  same  men  in  the  popish 
religion  would  have  been  visionary  saints,  hermits, 
Carthusians,  &c.  In  the  Indian  religion  they  would 
have  been  Ghebers%  and  their  cant  now  is  much  like 
the  other's  Ghiberish.  In  the  Mahometan,  they 
would  have  been  of  those  dervises  that  have  rap- 
tures of  crying  Allah,  Allah,  till  their  heads  grow 
giddy,  and  they  fall  down.  If  the  sets  of  opinions 
for  the  late  sects  have,  as  some  think,  been  con- 
trived by  the  Jesuits;  that  Jesuit  that  contrived 
this,  shewed  so  dull  a  faculty  for  the  Avork,  that  he 
might,  one  would  have  thought,  have  despaired  of 
any  disciples :  and  yet  it  is  become  one  of  the  most 
spreading  in  England.  A  late  author  says'',  he  has 
been  credibly  informed  that  a  St.  Omer's  Jesuit  de- 
clared, that  they  were  twenty  years  hammering  out 
the  sect  of  the  Quakers.  It  is  strange  they  could  not 
forge  nor  smoothe  it  any  handsomer.  For  as  all  poetry, 
fiction,  or  play,  ought  to  represent,  if  not  true  his- 
tory, yet  something  that  may  look,  or  be  conceived, 
like  it ;  so  they  that  would  frame  a  religion  pretend- 
ing to  be  founded  on  the  Scripture,  or  to  be  believed 

^  See  Mr.  Thevenot's  Travels  into  Persia. 

b  Foxes  and  Firebrands,  part  i.  page  4,  [by  Robert  Ware,  40. 
1680,  8vo.  1682— 1689.] 


364  The  Church  Officers. 

CHAP,    together  with  it,  should  dress  it  up  with  tenets  that 
have   some   appearance  of  likeness   to  the  declara- 


Year  after  |;jons   of  ScHpture ",   and  not   make  it   to  renounce 

the  apo-  ^ 

sties.  such  things  as  the  Scripture  does  enjoin  in  so  plain 
words  as  it  does  the  two  sacraments.  But  there  is 
a  sort  of  people  that  take  a  malicious  pleasure  in 
trying  how  broad  affronts  the  understanding  of  some 
men  will  bear. 

It  is  the  vulgar  people  among  the  Quakers  that 
we  speak  of  as  thus  led  by  the  nose,  and  possessed 
with  this  sort  of  enthusiasm.  Their  leaders  and  the 
])olitic  men  among  them  (if  they  be  not  of  the  fore- 
said hammerers)  seem  to  have  for  the  bottom  of 
their  religion,  deism  ;  and  to  think  that  reason  and 
human  philosophy  is  a  better  rule  for  a  man  to 
direct  his  conversation  by,  than  any  tradition  or 
revealed  doctrine.  For  what  other  than  such  is  the 
consequent  of  that  principle  ;  that  the  light  tvithin 
us,  which  comes  at  last  to  be  no  other  than  o:ir  own 
reason,  is  better  than  any  light  without  us,  i.  e.  than 
any  Scripture  ? 

20.  The  English  antipaedobaptists  have  for  their 
church-government,  Elders,  or  Presbyters :  these 
have  a  ruling  power  in  the  congregations.  Deacons  ; 
these  take  care  of  the  poor.  Teachers  ;  any  whom 
the  congregation  approves  of  for  that  purpose,  as  fit 
to  teach  :  so  of  these  they  have  abundance.  Yet 
those  congregations  of  them  that  are  accounted  the 
most  regular,  do  not  appoint  or  suffer  any  (that  are 
not  yet  ordained  elders)  to  preach  publicly,  but  only 
in  a  probational  way,  in  order  to  be  ordained  if  they 
continue  to  be  approved  :  except  on  some  case  of 
necessity,  as  in  the  want  of  elders,  &c.  They  have 
some    whom    they    call    messengers^    which    is    the 


The  CJmrch  Officers.  365 

English  word  for  apostles.     And  there  are  of  these  chap. 
two  sorts.     Some  are   such   of  their  presbyters,  as ^ 


being  found  of  the  best  ability,  judgment,  &c.  are '^''a'"  =»fter 
appointed  (beside  the  care  or  their  own  congrega- sties, 
tion)  to  go  sometimes  about  a  certain  district, 
diocese,  or  province.  And  when  any  of  these  come 
to  preach  in  any  other  man's  congregation,  or  to  be 
present  at  any  meeting  of  their  churches  ;  he  is  re- 
ceived and  heard  with  greater  respect  than  ordinary, 
and  his  authority  more  regarded  than  of  ordinary 
presbyters.  But  for  direct  and  proper  jurisdiction, 
over  other  presbyters  or  people,  he  has  none  :  nor 
any  power  of  ruling  but  in  his  own  congregation. 
The  other  sort  is  of  such  as  are  nothing-  else  but 
messengers  in  the  ordinary  sense  of  the  English 
word :  viz.  men  appointed  as  messengers  to  carry 
the  sense  and  opinion  of  some  congregations  to  other 
congregations  at  a  distance. 

They  have  some  whom  they  call  representatives : 
i.  e.  men  chosen  and  delegated  by  the  particular 
churches  that  they  have  all  over  England,  to  meet 
at  London  every  Whitsuntide,  to  consider  of  the 
common  affairs  of  their  religion.  This  meeting-  of 
representatives,  is,  as  I  take  it,  that  which  is  called 
the  General  Assembly;  something  resembling  our 
lower  house  of  Convocation.  The  place  is  in  Gos- 
well-street,  London.  But  one  congregation  does 
sometimes  send  two  or  three  representatives. 

All  these  are  chosen  with  the  approbation  of  the 
people :  only  the  people  themselves  are  in  their 
approbation  much  swayed  by  the  advice  of  their 
messengers,  elders,  &c.,  and  by  the  opinion  which 
they  give  concerning  the  fitness  of  any  one.     And 


366  The  Church  Officers. 

CHAP,   then  they  are  ordained  by  the  laying  on  of  an  elder's 
L_  liands. 


Uira^o^*"       They  do,  in   the   disputes   which    they  hold  with 
sties.  people   of  the  church  of  England,  frequently  urge 

that  this  their  way,  viz.  for  the  people  to  have  their 
suffrage  in  the  choice  of  church-officers,  is  the  most 
regular  way ;  as  being  that  which  was  used  by  the 
primitive  Christians.  Which  is  a  piece  of  history 
that  cannot  fairly  be  denied.  It  was  certainly  the 
primitive  way  for  the  bishop  to  choose  the  presbyters 
with  the  approbation  of  the  people:  and  for  the 
presbyters  and  people  together,  being  for  the  most 
part  assisted  by  some  neighbouring  bishops,  to 
choose  a  new  bishop  in  the  room  of  one  that  died. 
This  continued  for  many  hundred  years  :  and  those 
Christians  that  have  gone  about  to  mend  this  way, 
have  made  it  much  worse. 

But  the  antipaedobaptists  have  upon  the  whole  no 
reason  to  boast  of  the  regularity  of  their  manage- 
ment in  this  matter.  For  whereas  the  primitive 
practice  was,  as  I  said,  for  the  bishop  to  choose  the 
presbyters  with  the  approbation  of  the  people ;  the 
antipaedobaptists,  as  they  have  preserved  and  in- 
creased the  privilege  of  the  people,  have  quite  shut 
out  the  office  of  a  bishop,  (for  by  the  foregoing  ac- 
count, the  messenger  has  not  any  of  the  power  of  a 
bishop,)  which  of  the  two  is  the  more  necessary.  For 
the  multitude,  partly  for  want  of  judgment  concern- 
ing the  fitness  of  any  one,  and  partly  by  their  incli- 
nation to  faction  and  party,  and  being  puffed  up  for 
one  against  anotlier*^,  are  found  by  woeful  expe- 
rience, in  all  churches  where  that  way  is  used,  to  be 

c  I  Cor.  iv.  6. 


.Adjusting  Differences.  367 

wretched  choosers  for  themselves.     The  orig'inal  and   chap, 

...  .     ,     ,  ^' "I- 

primitive  pattern  is  the  best. 


21.  They  have  this  way  of  adjusting  differences  Jf^po-^'" 
that   arise   among  themselves   on    account    of   tres-**^^^^' 
passes,  dues,  or  other  money  matters ;  which  I  re- 
cite as  being  worthy  of  imitation.     If  any  one  of 
them  does  wrong  to  another,  or  refuses  to  do  or  to 

pay  what  is  equitable  in  any  case :  if  he  will  not 
be  brought  to  reason  by  a  private  arguing  of  the 
matter,  nor  by  the  verdict  of  two  or  three  neigh- 
bours added  ;  the  plaintiff  brings  the  case  before  the 
^congregation,  when  they  Avith  their  elder  are  as- 
sembled in  the  nature  of  a  vestry.  And  in  difficult 
cases,  there  lies  an  appeal  from  a  particular  congre- 
gation to  some  fuller  meeting  of  their  church  under 
a  messenger.  And  he  of  the  two  that  will  not 
stand  to  the  ultimate  determination  of  the  assembly 
by  their  usage  appointed,  is  no  longer  acknowledged 
by  the  rest  as  a  brother. 

As  this  is  very  much  according  to  our  Saviour's  ^^ 
and  St.  Paul's  '^  direction  in  such  cases  ;  so  I  have 
been  told  that  it  has  the  good  effect  to  prevent 
abundance  of  lawsuits,  and  end  many  quarrels : 
very  few  of  them  offering  to  withstand  the  general 
verdict  and  opinion  of  all  their  brethren.  And  there 
is  no  reason  to  doubt  but  that  a  like  course  would, 
if  it  were  put  in  practice,  have  a  like  good  effect 
among  other  societies  of  Christians. 

22.  The  like  discipline  (of  renouncing  brother- 
hood) they  use  against  such  of  their  communion  as 
are  known  to  be  guilty  of  any  such  immorality,  as 
is  a  scandal  to  the  Christian  profession  of  a  sober 
and  godly   life  :  for   which  care   of  their  members 

d  Matt,  xviii.  15,  1 6,  17.  *^  i  Cor.  vi.  1,2,  &c. 


368  Discipline  of  Excommunication. 

CHAP,  there  is  no  man    but    will   commend    them.     And 

VIII. 

therefore  I  do  not  mention  the  ordering  of  this  as 

thrapo-*^'^  particular  in   them  :  all  churches  by  their  constitu- 
sties.  ^JQj-j  ^Q  order  the  same  thing  to  be  done.     But  the 

administration,  or  putting  in  execution  of  this  or- 
der, is  in  some  churches  very  slack  and  negligent ; 
and  in  some,  very  much  perverted  by  corrupt  officers 
of  the  courts.  The  bishop's  visiting  of  every  parish 
in  particular  (which  Mdien  it  began  first  to  be  omit- 
ted by  some  bishops,  was  so  earnestly  enjoined  by 
canonsf)  is  now  almost  antiquated  and  forgotten. 
And  there  is  many  times  a  very  huddling  work 
made  of  a  visitation. 

So  far  as  this  discipline  is  omitted  or  perverted 
in  any  church  ;  so  far  is  that  church  fallen  into  a 
very  dangerous  decay.  Among  all  the  exceptions 
made  by  the  several  sorts  of  dissenters  against  the 
church  of  England,  there  is  none  nigh  so  material 
as  this :  nor  is  there  any  neglect,  the  amending 
whereof  would,  beside  the  stopping  of  the  mouths 
of  gainsayers,  produce  a  greater  spiritual  advantage 
to  their  people.  In  the  mean  time  the  dissenters 
ought  to  consider  and  allow  these  things  following  : 
1.  That  this  is  much  more  difficult  in  a  national 
church,  than  in  one  of  their  societies.  For  none 
side  with  them  but  what  do  it  out  of  some  zeal : 
whether  it  bo  a  true  and  godly  zeal,  or  an  ignorant 
and  factious  one ;  still  it  is  zeal,  and  may  be  made 
use  of  to  a  vigorous  execution  of  the  orders  passed 
among  them.  But  there  is  in  all  nations,  besides 
the  zealous  men,  a  sort  of  '  flying  squadron,'   that 

f  SeeBochelli  Decreta  Eccles.  Gall.  lib.  v,  tit.  15.  c.  2,  5,  9,  &c. 
Item,  Bishop  Stillingfleet's  Charge  at  his  Primary  Visitation, 
page  54,  &c. 


I 


Discipline  of  Excommunication.  369 

have  really  no  concern  at  all  for  any  religion,  but  be-  chap. 
ing  perfectly  indifferent,  do  of  course  fall  in  with  the     ^"^" 


national  church,  as  being  the  most  fashionable  at  ^'''^'"  ^*^'" 
that  time.  These,  wherever  they  light,  are  a  great  ^'^es. 
hinderance  to  the  due  execution  of  any  canons  for 
discipline.  They  are,  either  by  their  riches  and 
power  too  big,  or  else  by  their  number  too  many, 
for  the  force  of  the  law.  The  dissenters,  notwith- 
standing the  boasts  of  their  exactness  of  discipline, 
would  find  themselves  embarrassed,  if  this  were 
their  case. 

2.    That    though    the    Scripture    does    command 
churches  to  excommunicate  wicked  men,  yet  it  does 
not   allow   private   men   to   make   separations    from 
a  church  that  does  not  duly  practise  that  command. 
Let  a  man  but  take  care  that  he  do  not  deserve  by 
his  own  wickedness  to  be  turned  out  of  the  church  ; 
and   if  others  who  do   deserve  it,  be   not,    upon   a 
motion  made,  turned  out,  that  is  not  his  fault,  nor 
will   be   imputed  to  him.     The  church   of  Corinth 
was  faulty  in   this,  when   St.  Paul    wrote    his   first 
Epistle  to  them  :  and  though  he  does  there  §  reprove 
them  for  this  fault ;  yet  at  the  time  of  his  second 
Epistle,  there  were  still  many  wicked  men*^  whom 
they  had  not  yet  turned  out ;  and  yet  in  both  his 
Epistles >  he  charges  that   none  go   about  to  make 
any  division.     And    from   that   time   to   this    time, 
there  has  been  no  church  free  from  these  '  spots  in 
'  the  feasts  of  charity.'     It  is  indeed  impossible  for 
any  church,  while  it  is  in  this  world,  absolutely  to 
free  itself.     In   the  mean   time,   private   Christians 
are  advised  to  withdraw  their  familiarity^  and  con- 

g  I  Cor.  V.  2,  b  2  Cor.  xii.  20,  2  i.  >  i  Cor.  i.  10  ; 

2  Cor.  xiii.  n,  12.  k  j  Cor.  v.  11. 

WALL,  VOL.  II.  B  b 


370  Discipline  of  Excommunication. 

CHAP,    versation  from   those  that  they  know  to  be  such. 
^^^^-     And   so   far,   every  private  man  has  the  power  of 
Year  after  exoommunication  in  his  own  breast. 

the  apo-  IP  ,  o 

sties.  3.  That  whereas  there  are  but  four  sorts  ot  men 

whom  the  Scripture  does  command  to  be  excom- 
municated:    1.  Idolaters ^  unbelievers "^  teachers  of 
false  doctrine  in  the  fundamentals"  of  the  faith ; 
2.  Men  of  vicious  and  immoral  lives°  ;  3.  Such  as 
in  points  of  trespasses  or  differences  between  man 
and  man,  will  not  hear  the  church?  ;  and  fourthly, 
those  that  make  divisions  in  or  from  a  church  : — 
the   dissenters   and    dividing  parties  should,  amidst 
all  the  zeal  that  they  shew  for  executing  the  law 
upon  the  first  three  sorts,  remember  that  the  law 
is  as  full,  as  plain,  as  peremptory  against  the  fourth 
sort,  as  against  any  of  the  other.     For  there  is  not 
a  text  in   all  the  Scripture  that  is  plainer  against 
any  sin,  or  that  does  more  expressly  command  any 
sort  of  sinners  to  be  excommunicated,  than  is  that  of 
St.  Paul,  Rom.  xvi.  17 ;    Now   I  beseech  you,   bre- 
thren,   mark    them   which   cause   divisions    and   of- 
fences,   contrary    to    the    doctrine    which    ye    ha,ve 
learned  ;  and  avoid  them.     Therefore  he  that  thinks 
adultery  to  be  a  sin,  and  drunkenness  to  be  a  sin,  &c. 
and  schism   to  be   none;    or  that  a  man  is  to    be 
avoided  or  excommunicated  for  the  one,  but  not  for 
the  other;  is  one  that  does  not  take  Christ's  com- 
mands as  they  lie  in  Scripture,  but  picks  out  some 
that  he  will  observe,  and  others  that  he  will  slight, 
according   as  they  please  or   displease  his  humour. 
The  word  of  God  is,  that  every  one  should  avoid, 
or   separate  from  him  that  goes  about  to  make  a 

1  2  Cor.  vi.  i6,  17.  ^2  Cor.  xiv.  15.  ^2  Tim.  ii.  16, 

17,18.  o  I  Cor.  V.  7,  12.  P  Matt,  xviii.  17. 


Jestdts  creeping  in  among  the  Dissenters.  371 

separation.     The  dissenters,  if  they  apply  this,  will   chap. 
be  inclined  to  a  little  more  moderation  and  charity 


in  the  censures  that  they  pass  upon  national  churches,  ^j^^""^  ^^^^'^ 
for  their  want  of  so  severe  a  discipline  as  they  calb'^*^^* 
for. 

23.  The  English  antipaedobaptists  have,  as  the 
other  separating  parties  in  England  have,  some 
Jesuits,  that  in  disguise  do  ever  now  and  then 
strive  to  insinuate  and  get  in  among  them.  This 
society  did  at  first  exert  the  chief  of  their  strength, 
and  employ  the  ablest  men  they  had,  in  writing 
books  of  controversy  against  the  protestants :  and 
they  had  the  repute  of  having  puzzled  the  cause 
better  than  any  other  popish  writers  had.  This  way, 
however  unfairly  managed  by  them,  had  yet  this 
commendation  ;  that  it  was  fighting  in  open  field. 
But  having  been  there  repulsed  with  some  loss,  it  is 
now  a  long  time  since,  that  they  have  wholly  taken 
to  that  w^ay  which  Dr.  Stillingfleet,  thirty  years 
ago^,  called  their  'present  way  of  pickeering  and 
'  lying  under  hedges.'  They  will  turn  themselves 
into  any  shape,  pretend  to  be  of  any  religion,  put  on 
the  disguise  of  tradesmen,  handicraftsmen,  soldiers, 
physicians,  &c.,  to  get  an  opportunity  either  of 
making  proselytes  to  the  church  of  Rome,  or  of  pro- 
moting divisions  among  protestants.  But  there  is 
no  employment  they  love  so  well,  as  that  of  a 
preacher  in  any  of  the  separate  congregations. 
They  can  act  this  part  notably.  They  stick  not 
in  their  sermons  to  rail  as  fiercely  as  any  against 
the  pope  of  Rome,  so  that  they  may  use  the  credit, 

q  Discourse  concerning  the  Idolatry  of  the  Church  of  Rome, 
preface.     [This  work  was  published  in  the  year  1676,  8°.] 

B  b  2 


372  Jesuits  in  Disguise  creeping  in 

CHAP,  which  they  thereby  get  with  the  dehided  people,  to 

'—  engage  them  deeper  in  principles  of  separation  from 

irap^o'-^'  the  established  church  of  the  countries  where  they 
sties.         \i\e.     Sometimes  they  have  been  detected  in  their 
lifetimes  ;  and  sometimes  the  cheat  has  not  appeared 
till  a  good  while  after. 

The  author  of  a  book  called  Foxes  and  Fire- 
brands'", has  collected  out  of  histories,  records, 
letters,  &c.,  abundance  of  instances  wherein  they 
have  been  found  instilling  or  inflaming  principles  of 
separation  among  all  the  sects  or  divided  parties  in 
England  and  Scotland  ever  since  the  reformation. 
And  out  of  him  the  author  of  a  book,  called  The 
Picture  of  the  Anabaptists S  has  recited  such, 
wherein  they  have  been  concerned  with  the  antippe- 
dobaptists.     I  shall  not  here  repeat  them. 

One  instance,  which  shews  how  long  it  is  some- 
times before  the  intrigue  is  discovered,  is  this:  in 
the  former  years  of  queen  Elizabeth's  time,  there 
were  a  sort  of  people  called  Puritans,  that  expressed 
some  dislike  at  some  orders  or  ceremonies  of  the 
church  of  England ;  but  yet  did  not  proceed  to  se- 
paration, but,  on  the  contrary,  declared  an  abhor- 
•467-rence  of  it.  But  about  the  year  1567,  'there  suc- 
'  ceeded  them  (as  Fuller  relating  the  matter  ex- 
presses it*)  'another  generation  of  active  and  zealous 

*  nonconformists.  Of  these  Coleman,  Button,  Hal- 
'  lingham,  and  Benson  were  the  chief:  inveighing 
'  against  the  established  church-discipline :  account- 

*  ing  every  thing  from  Rome,  which  was  not  from 

«■  [Robert  Ware  :  see  above,  p.  363.] 
s  [David  Russen  :  see  above,  p.  354.] 
*  Church  History,  lib.  ix.  [sect.  9.  p.  81 .] 


among  the  Antipcedobaptists.  373 

*  Geneva:  endeavouring  in  all  things  to  conform  the  chap. 

*  government  of  the  English  church  to  the  presby- 


terian  reformation.'  },^^''  ^''*''' 

the  apo- 

Camden"  and  Heylyn^  do  mention  the  same  men*''^*- 
with  the  same  character :  as  opposing  the  discipline, 
Liturgy,  calling  of  our  bishops  as  approaching  too 
near  to  the  church  of  Rome,  &c. 

Now  neither  Camden,  Heylyn,  nor  Fuller,  who 
recite  the  names  of  these  men,  ever  knew  any  thing 
to  the  contrary,  but  that  they  were  really  such  as 
they  pretended,  viz.  protestants  puritanically  in- 
clined :  much  less  did  the  people  that  were  led  into 
separation  by  them  know  any  thing. 

But  a  hundred  years  after  the  time  that  these  1585. 
men  and  their  first  associates  must  have  been  dead* 
viz.  about  twenty  years  ago,  it  was  discovered  that 
three  of  the  four,  viz.  Hallingham,  Coleman,  and 
Benson,  were  Jesuits ;  and  that,  by  the  sagacity  of 
bishop  Stillingflecty  comparing  the  histories  of  those 
times  with  some  Jesuits'  letters  intercepted  about 
the  same  time. 

The  chief  letter  to  this  purpose  is  recited  by 
the  foresaid  author  of  Foxes  and  Firebrands  z,  and 
averred  by  him  to  be  '  a  true  copy  taken  out  of  the 
*  registry  of  the  ej)iscopal  see  of  Rochester,  in  that 
'  book  which  begins  anno  2  and  3  Philip  and  jVIary, 
'  and  is  continued  to  15  Eliz.' 

What  he  recites  from  that  book  is  to  this  purpose. 
In  the  year  1568,  one  Heth  went  about  the  lower, ^gg. 
parts   of  Kent,  preaching   up   division  and  a  purer 

u  Annal,  Elizab.  ad  ann.  1568. 
"  History  of  Presbyter,  book  vi.  p.  257. 
y  Unreasonableness  of  Separation,  preface, 
'  Part  i.  page  15. 


374  Jesuits  in  Disguise  creeping  in 

CHAP,  reformation:   he   came  to  Rochester,  and  they,  not 
^^^^"     knowing  what  seditious  doctrines  he  had  preached 


Year  after  jj^  ^\^q   countrv  placcs,  admitted   liim  to  preach  in 

the  apo-  •'     '  '^         ^ 

Sties.  the  cathedral.  The  next  day  there  was  found  in  the 
pulpit  a  letter  that  had  dropped  from  him,  written 
to  him  from  one  Malt,  a  Jesuit  at  Madrid,  (which 
is  there  recited  at  large,)  applauding  the  course  he 
took,  and  advertising  him  of  the  success  of  some 
others  sent  on  the  like  errand  :  and  adding  these 
words :  '  Hallingham,  Coleman,  and  Benson  have 
'  set  a  faction  among  the  German  heretics,  so  that 

*  several  who  have  turned  from  us  have  now  denied 

*  their  baptism.'  This  and  other  evidences  being 
brought,  he  was  convicted  in  the  bishop's  court  at 
Rochester  to  be  a  Jesuit,  and  could  not  any  longer 
deny  it.  In  his  boots  were  found  his  beads,  and  a 
pope's  bull  for  the  Jesuits  to  preach  what  doctrine 
they  pleased  for  dividing  of  protestants,  particularly 
naming  the  English.  And  in  his  trunk  were  several 
books  for  denying  baptism  to  infants. 

The  author  of  this  recital  makes  no  use  of  this 
passage  of  the  letter  about  Hallingham,  Coleman, 
and  Benson.  But  bishop  Stillingfleet  shews,  that 
they  must  have  been  the  same  men  mentioned  by 
the  foresaid  historians :  and  that  by  German  heretics 
are  meant  any  protestants ;  that  religion  being  then 
called  the  German  heresy. 

The  book  from  whence  this  is  quoted  must  pro- 
bably have  been  then  in  the  registry,  because  the 
said  author  (who  was  accounted  a  man  of  credit) 
would  not  else  so  positively  have  referred  to  it. 
But  I  understand  by  inquiry  that  it  is  not  now 
there.  By  what  interest  it  can  have  been  taken 
away   since    that    time,    (which    was    about    thirty 


among  the  Antipcedobaptists.  375 

years  ago,)  is  hard  to  guess.     But  however,  it  seems  chap. 
that  Mr.  Russen,  who  says^  at  present,  '  if  they  look 


'  upon  this  story  as  untrue,  let  them  search  the  re- J^g''!^''^^^^'^ 
'  gister,  &c.,  where  they  shall  find  to  their  ignominy  ^'■'^^• 
*  the  verity  thereof,'  is  mistaken. 

P.  S.  Since  the  writing  of  this,  I  understand  that 
it  is  said  to  have  been  stolen  away  in  the  late  king 
James'  time.  A  neighbour  clergyman,  the  reverend 
and  learned  Mr.  Edward  Brown,  rector  of  8undrish 
in  Kent'',  now  deceased,  was  told  so  by  an  old 
officer  of  the  church  of  Rochester.  And  he  left  a 
memorandum  of  it  in  writing  with  Dr.  Barker,  rector 
of  Brasthead,  who  since  Mr.  Brown's  death  told  me 
he  had  it.  But  the  i)ersons  are  now  all  dead,  and  the 
written  memorandum  is  lost. 

I  shall  mention  but  one  case  more ;  and  that  is 
one  which  is  not  taken  notice  of  by  the  foresaid 
collectors.  All  that  I  understand  of  it  is  from  a 
pamphlet  printed  by  one  Everard  in  the  year  1664. 
By  which  it  appears  that  he  in  Cromwell's  time 
had  been  a  captain  of  horse,  and  a  noted  preacher 
against  infant-baptism.  He  speaks  as  if  he  had 
had  a  great  many  converts.  This  time  at  which 
he  printed  his  pamphlet  was  a  time  in  which  it 
was  impossible  for  him  to  carry  on  that  trade  in 
a  disguise  any  longer.  So  he  faces  about,  and 
endeavours  to  decoy  them  over  with  him  to  the 
church  of  Rome.  To  this  purjiose  he  pretends  that 
it  had  pleased  God  to  bring  him  to  an  opportunity 
of  discoursing  concerning  religion  with  a  very  grave 

a  Ch.  vii. 

^  [In  the  'Additions  and  Alterations  in  the  third  edition,  8cc.' 
appended  to  his  '  Defence,'  Dr.  Wall  had  added  here  the  words, 
'  who  was  born  and  bred  at  Rochester.'] 


376  Jesuits  maintaining  that  Infant-haptism 

CHAP,  and   judicious    gentleman,    who   '  examining    every 

„, 1_  '  tbing  from  the  bottom,  and  laying  the  axe  to  the 

Z^^lfr!'^'^  '  root  of  the  tree,  &c.,  asked  him  in  the  first  place, 
sties,  «  whether  he  was  sure  and  certain,  that  the  Christian 

'  religion  in  general  was  more  true  than  the  religion 
'  of  the  Turks,  Jews,'  &c.  In  short,  this  man  had  by 
degrees  made  him  see  that  there  is  no  firm  reliance 
for  one's  faith  either  on  the  Scripture,  or  on  the 
direction  of  the  Spirit,  or  on  reason ;  but  only  on 
the  authority  of  the  catholic  church,  by  which  he 
all  along  means  the  church  of  Rome.  So  he  gives 
to  his  pamphlet  this  title;  'An  Epistle  to  the  several 
'  Congregations  of  the  Nonconformists  :  by  Capt. 
'  Robert  Everard,  now  by  God's  grace  a  member  of 
'  the  Holy  catholic  Church  of  Christ :  shewing  the 
'  Reasons  of  his  Conversion  and  Submission  to  the 
*  said  Catholic  Church,'  printed  1664<=. 

But  the  reasons  therein  given  are  so  exactly  the 
same  with  the  ordinary  sophisms  which  the  Jesuits 
commonly  use  to  amaze  and  confound  the  minds 
of  ignorant  people,  and  the  writer  of  them  sets 
them  forth  with  so  much  of  the  same  sort  of  art ; 
that  he  that  reads  the  book  will  easily  discern,  that 
Everard  was  not  now  converted,  but  was  a  papist 
before. 

We  must  think  that  the  instances  of  this  nature 
that  have  been  discovered  are  probably  but  few  in 
comparison  with  those  that  never  have  been  so. 
We  oftener  find  where  these  men  have  been,  than 
where   they  are  :   and   it  were   happy  for   England, 

<=  (^This  work  was  printed  at  Paris,  and  consists  of  forty  pages 
in  quarto.  Tlie  Bodleian  library  possesses  a  copy  formerly 
belonging  to  bishop  Barlow,  and  containing  a  few  MS.  notes 
by  him.] 


cannot  he  proved  from  Scripture.  377 

if  they  had   some   mark,  whereby  they  might   be  chap. 
known.  '— 


There  is  one  tenet  of  the  antipa^dobaptists  in  ^hrapt^'^'^ 
which  the  Jesuits  concur  with  them,  not  only  when^*^*^*- 
they  are  in  this  disguise,  but  also  in  their  late 
books  to  which  they  set  their  names :  that  is,  '  that 
*  infant-baptism  cannot  be  proved  from  Scripture.' 
The  old  books  of  the  papists,  and  even  of  some  Je- 
suits, do,  as  well  as  the  books  of  protestants,  prove 
it  by  arguments  from  Scripture,  as  archbishop  Laud 
and  Vossius  have  largely  shewn  *^.  But  the  late 
Jesuits  have  given  a  politic  turn  to  that  point  of 
the  Romish  doctrine,  and  say,  that  it  can  be  proved 
only  by  the  custom  and  tradition  of  the  church. 
They  serve  two  designs  by  this  device.  One  is, 
to  puzzle  the  protestants  in  general,  who  maintain 
that  the  Scripture  is  a  sufficient  rule.  The  other  is, 
to  encourage  the  antipsedobaptists  that  are  among 
the  protestants,  in  their  opinion  and  separation. 
To  which  purpose  they  do  in  their  books  furnish 
them  with  answers  to  all  the  arguments  brought 
from  Scripture. 

Col.  Danvers  says  **,  '  A  great  papist,  lately  in 
'  London,  going  to  a  dispute  about  infants'  baptism, 
'  told  his  friend,  he  was  "  going  to  hear  a  miracle, 
'  viz.  infants'  baptism  to  be  proved  liy  Scripture.'" 

And  one  E.  P.  an  antipaedobaptist  preacher,  for- 
merly of  Deptford,  now,  I  think,  about  Dover  in 
Kent,  in  a  pamphlet  which  he  entitles,  A  three- 
penny Answer,  &c.  has  this  remark  f,  '  A  popish 
'  priest  confest  to   a  minister  of  the  baptized  way, 

'^  [In  his  treatise  '  De  Baptismo,'  Op.  torn.  vi.  folio.] 
^  Treatise  of  Baptism,  second  edition,  p.  134. 
f  Page  25. 


378  Jesuits  maintaining  that  Infant-baptism 

CHAP.   '  that  "there  is  no  Scripture  for  baptizing  infants: 

'  but  yet  it  ought  to  be  done,  because  the  church 

Ihel ^iT  *  has    commanded   it."     This   was   a   true   and   in- 
sties.  i  genuous  confession.'     There  is  no  doubt  but  this 

priest  would,  if  JNIr.  P.  had  given  leave,  have 
preached  the  same  in  his  congregation.  And  if  he 
might  have  preached  in  a  vizor,  would  have  said  it 
oue'ht  not  to  be  done  at  all. 

But  I  do  not  so  much  wonder  at  these  two,  as  I 
do  at  Mr.  Stennet,  who,  in  his  late  Answer  to  Mr. 
Russen  s,  has  thought  fit  to  strengthen  his  cause 
not  only  by  quoting  cardinal  Perron,  Fisher  the 
Jesuit,  &c.,  but  has  spent  eleven  whole  pages  in 
giving  us  an  harangue  of  Mr.  Bossuet,  a  late  popish 
author,  written  in  favour  of  the  antipaedobaptists. 
Is  it  news  to  Mr.  Stennet  too,  that  the  papists  for 
these  eighty  years  past  do  this  against  their  own 
conscience,  and  out  of  a  design  against  the  pro- 
testants  in  general  ?  If  it  be,  let  him  consult  and 
compare  the  popish  writers,  and  he  will  find  that 
before  that  time  they  do  themselves  all  of  them 
prove  infant-baptism  by  Scripture,  and  that  it  is 
only  the  later  ones  that  have  altered  their  tale. 
There  seems  to  have  been  about  that  time  a  consult 
of  the  Jesuits,  wherein  it  was  resolved  to  give  this 
cue  to  the  writers  of  their  side.  Cardinal  Perron 
began  this  course :  and  the  learned  Rivet  even  then 
smelled  the  design,  and  gave  the  world  notice  of  it, 
as  I  shewed  ch.  ii.  ^.  9.  Yet  even  still  the  papists 
carry  it  on  in  new  writings  every  day :  and  it  takes, 
it  seems,  (not  only  as  SafFold's  bills  do  with  the  new 
folks  that  come  to  town  every  year,  but)  even  with 
some  of  the   wiser  sort.     If  the  discourse  that  he 

s  [8vo.  London,  1704;  p.  174 — 184.] 


cannot  he  proved  from  Scripture.  379 

recites  so  at  length,  had  any  thing  of  new  argument   chap. 
in  it;  it  might  be  used,   come    it    from    whom    it     ^^^" 


would.     But  there   is  nothino^   of  that,  but  what  is  \ea'- after 

'-'  the  apo- 

common,  and  even  trivial,  and   has  been  answered  sties. 
a    hundred    times.     It    affirms    that    infant-baptism 
depends  solely  on  the  tradition  of  the  church  :  but 
this  is  said  dictator-like. 

And  for  the  complying  answer,  that  is  there 
given,  and  fills  four  or  five  pages  more ;  which  was 
written,  it  seems,  by  Mr.  de  la  Roque :  I  thought 
at  first  it  had  been  a  sham ;  it  looks  as  if  the  author 
himself,  or  some  other  papist  or  antipsedobaptist, 
had  framed  an  answer  under  the  name  of  a  pro- 
testant,  such  as  they  would  have.  But  Mr.  de  la 
Roque  was,  it  seems,  a  learned  man  in  other  points, 
and  has  well  refuted  the  main  of  his  adversary's 
book ;  which  is  of  communion  in  one  kind  :  but 
having  occasion  to  speak  of  this  matter  only  by  the 
by,  and  having  not  studied  it,  but  depending  on 
Grotius,  and  having  not  well  minded  what  Grotius 
says  neither,  he  has  yielded  even  more  than  his  op- 
ponent pretended  to.  The  opponent  had  said  that 
infant-baptism  depends  '  solely  on  the  tradition  of 
*  the  church.'  The  answerer  throws  away  even  this 
grant;  and  says,  'The  primitive  church  did  not 
'  baptize  infants,'  p.  188.  and  proves  it  by  nothing, 
but  an  allegation,  that  is  quite  mistaken  in  matter 
of  fact :  he  says,  *  the  learned  Grotius  proves  it  in 
'  his  Annotations  on  the  Gospel'  Let  any  one  read 
the  annotations,  and  he  will  see  that  Grotius,  (how 
much  soever  he  acts  the  prevaricator  at  that  pjace,) 
so  far  from  proving,  does  not  pretend  that  there 
ever  was  a  time  in  which  the  church  '  did  not  bap- 
'  tize  infants  :'   but    only   '  libertatem    et  consuetu- 


380        Jesuits  maintaining  that  Infant-haptism,  S^c. 

CHAP.   '  dinis  differentiam,'  *the  liberty  and  difference  of 

L_  '  the  custom  ;'  viz.  that  some  in  the  church  did,  and 

IhelplT   some   did   not.     And   how  groundless  his  pretence 
sties.         even  of  that  is,  I  have  endeavoured  to  shew  at  the 
foresaid  ch.  ii.  ^.  9. 

One  would  think,  that  even  the  weakest  among 
the  antipsedobaptists  should  apprehend,  that  this 
new  favour  and  lovingkindness  which  the  priests 
and  Jesuits  shew  to  their  side,  is  all  of  the  same 
stamp  and  design,  as  was  that  which  the  late  king 
James,  by  counsel  of  the  same  men,  shewed  to  the 
dissenters  in  general ;  viz.  that  by  furthering  the 
division,  they  might  weaken  us  all.  And  as  all  the 
honest  men  among  the  dissenters  then  did  scorn  and 
refuse  those  favours,  when  they  saw  whither  they 
tended  ;  so  ought  the  antipsedobaptists  in  tliis  case. 
But  if  they  will  not  be  dissuaded  from  tampering 
with  the  deceitful  gifts  of  the  enemy ;  then  their 
best  way  is,  to  do  as  some  have  done  before  them, 
viz.  to  borrow  the  arguments  of  the  Jesuits  without 
saying  where  they  have  them.  For  people  will  be 
never  the  more  persuaded  that  infant-baptism  can- 
not be  proved  from  Scripture,  because  a  papist 
says  so. 

The  English  antipaedobaptists  are  as  careful  as 
men  in  their  circumstances  can  well  be,  against  this 
intrusion  of  pai:)ists  in  disguise ;  by  requiring  an  ac- 
count of  any  new  preacher  coming  to  them  :  but  it 
is  a  thing  that  can  hardly  be  ever  totally  prevented 
without  a  draught  of  articles  of  religion,  to  which 
every  preacher  should  subscribe. 

VII.  Of  the  antipaedobaptists  in  Poland  I  have 
not  much  to  say ;  save  that  they  were  formerly 
there  in  great  numbers.     Laelius  Socinus  about  the 


Antipcedoba^ytists  of  Poland^  Bohemia,  Sfc.         381 
year    1550,    and    after   him    his    nephew    Fanstus,  chap 


VIII. 


broached  there  a  most  desperate  opinion  against  the 
divinity  of  our  Saviour  Christ  ^ ;  Who  is  over  all,  ^h^lpo-^' 
God  blessed  for  ever.  Amen.  Some  heretics  of  old^*'"^*- 
(but  yet  none  within  one  thousand  years  of  that  '^^°' 
time)  had  held  that  Jesus  was  a  mere  man :  and 
that  the  word  or  A0709  did  only  come  upon  him,  or 
inhabit  in  him.  But  these  men  taught,  tliat  even 
the  WORD  himself,  of  whom  St.  John  speaks,  was  a 
creature.  Which  was  a  heresy  perfectly  new,  and 
surpassing  in  impiety  almost  all  that  ever  were.  So 
they  renounced  the  doctrine  of  the  Trinity.  The 
form  of  words  by  which  Christians  are  baptized, 
In  the  name  of  the  Father,  the  Son,  and  the  Holy 
Spirit,  stood  in  their  way.  Socinus  therefore  ex- 
pressed a  very  slighting  opinion  of  all  water-bap- 
tism. He  would  have  it  be  accounted  needless  in  a 
nation  that  is  settled  in  the  profession  of  Chris- 
tianity. He  said',  the  apostles  practised  it;  but 
they  had  no  command  so  to  do  :  and  so  other  Chris- 
tians might  use  it  as  an  indifferent  thing.  That 
they  may  baptize,  if  they  will ;  or  let  it  alone,  if 
they  will.  And  if  they  will  give  baptism,  they  may 
give  it  in  infancy  or  in  adult  age :  it  is  muchwhat 
one.  His  followers,  many  of  them,  took  him  at  this 
last  proposal.  They  would  baptize,  but  not  in 
infancy. 

There  were  also  some  other  antipaedobaptists  that 
were  not  Socinians.  But  they  were  so  generally 
mixed,  that  the  ordinary  name  given  to  all  Socinians 

^  Rom.  ix.  5. 

i  Disput.  de  Baptismo.  Epist.  de  Bapti:*mo  ad  Virum  nobilem. 
Epist.  altera  de  Baptismo.  [printed  in  8".  at  Rakow,  in  1 6 1 3  : 
and  again,  in  the  collection  of  Socinus'  works  in  folio.] 


382  Antipoidohaptists  of  Poland,  Bohemia^  8)X. 

CHAP,  was  Anabaptists.     About  the  year  1650,  they  were 

_  by  public  edicts  expelled  that  kingdom  :  as  the  pro- 

tijg^apo-^'^  testants  in  general  have  since  been. 

sties.  ^j^(]  i\^Q  same  may  be  said  of  Bohemia  and  Mo- 

1550. 

ravia,  and  some  other  countries  thereabouts.     There 

were  for  about  one  hundred  years  many  antipsedo- 
baptists  mixed  with  the  protestants  in  those  coun- 
tries. But  both  one  and  the  other  have  since  been 
by  popish  persecutions  either  perverted,  or  forced  to 
seek  new  seats. 

In  Hungary  and  Transylvania,  but  especially  the 
latter,  there  are  said  to  be  still  considerable  numbers 
of  them  ;  some  towns  and  villages  consisting  mostly 
of  these  men.  But  it  is  said  withal'*,  that  they  are 
mostly  Socinians.  There  were  in  Transylvania  so 
long  ago  as  the  time  of  the  later  Socinus  beforemen- 
tioned,  viz.  Faustus  Socinus,  some  of  these  that  were 
deeper  in  that  heresy,  if  possible,  than  he  himself 
was.  They  held,  as  he  tells  us',  '  the  doctrines  of 
'  the  Trinity  and  of  Infant-baptism  to  be  the 
'  chief  errors  of  the  other  churches.  So  that  if  any 
'  one  would  renounce  these  two,  and  would  firmly 

*  hold,  that  all  that  have  been  baptized  in  infancy 

*  must  be  baptized  when  they  are  grown  up ;  they 
'  would  own  such   an   one   for  a  brother   in    point 

*  of  doctrine,'  &c.  though  he  differed  in  some  other 
things. 

This  is  a  gracious  condescension.  But  yet  I 
question  whether,  as  the  case  stands,  it  will  induce 
many  to  accept  of  the  pro]3osal :  because  all  people 
thereabouts  know,  that  by  complying  but  a  very  little 
further,  they  may  be  admitted  for  true  Mussulmen, 

^  Osiander,  Appendix  Histor. 

1  Epist.  de  Baptismo  ad  Virum  nobilem. 


Dippinn  ordinarily  nsed  in  Baptism.  383 

and  allowed  to  wear  white   turbans  in  the  city  of  chap. 
Stambol,  an   honour  which  these    gentlemen  seem 


very  ambitious  of.     But  as  for  those  that  desire  to  t^^Hpo-*^"^ 
keep  the  name   of  Christians,  God   preserve   them^^^'^''- 
from  the  folly  of  buying  the  brotherhood  of  these 
men   at  so  dear  a  rate  as  the  renouncing  of  their 
God. 


CHAP.  IX. 

Of  the  most  ancient  Rites  of  Baptism. 

§.  I.  THE  rites  and  circumstances  attending  bap- 
tism have  been  largely  handled  by  Jose})hus  Vice- 
comes™.  I  shall  only  briefly  mention  some  of  the 
most  ancient. 

It  was  the  custom  of  every  church  of  Christians 
to  require  adult  persons  that  were  to  be  baptized,  to 
spend  some  time  in  prayer  and  fasting  before  their 
entrance  into  that  holy  covenant :  that  they  might 
come  with  greater  seriousness  and  steadfastness  of 
resolution  to  the  sacrament  thereof.  And  the 
church  did  use  to  fast  and  pray  with  them  and  for 
them. 

This  fasting,  though  it  be  nowhere  mentioned  in 
Scripture,  yet  is  expressly  put  among  the  customs 
of  the  Christians  by  Justin  Martyr,  (who  must  have  40. 
been  born  in  the  Scripture-times,)  in  that  apology 
which  he  makes  to  the  heathen  emperors  concern- 
ing the  tenets  and  practices  of  the  Christians.  The 
place  I  recited  before". 

And  so  it  is  also  by  Tertullian".     'They,'  says  he,  .00. 
'  that  come  to  baptism,  must  use  the  devotions  of 

™  [See  above,  at  p.  266,  a  notice  of  his  work  on  this  subject.] 
"  Part  i.  ch.  I  I.  §.  3.  o  Lib.  de  Baptismo,  cap.  20. 


384  Dippinff  ordinarily  used  in  Baptism. 

CHAP.   '  frequent  prayers,  fastings,   kneelings,  and    watch- 
'  ings,  and  the  confession  of  all  their  past  sins ;  that 


^"h^apo^^  *  they  may  at  least    do  as   much   as  was    done    in 
sties.         <  John's  baptism  :    TJiey  were    baptized.,   it    is    said, 
'  confessing  their  sins.'' 

I  said  before?,  that  it  is  probable  that  this  was 
none  of  the  least  reasons  for  keeping  the  Lent  fast ; 
because  the  baptism  of  so  many  people  was  to  be  at 
Easter.  The  council  of  Laodicea  do  order'!,  '  that 
'  none  be  admitted  to  baptism  at  Easter,  that 
'  does  not  give  in  his  name  before  a  fortnight  of 
'  Lent  be  out.  And  that  they  must  all  be  able  to 
'  say  the  Creed  by  Thursday  before  Easter.  And 
*  that,  if  any  be  baptized  in  sickness  ;  when  they 
'  recover,  they  must  learn  and  recite  it.' 

II.  Their  general  and  ordinary  way  was  to  bap- 
tize by  immersion,  or  dipping  the  person,  whether 
it  were  an  infant,  or  grown  man  or  woman,  into 
the  water.  This  is  so  plain  and  clear  by  an  infinite 
number  of  passages,  that,  as  one  cannot  but  pity 
the  weak  endeavours  of  such  paedobaptists  as  would 
maintain  the  negative  of  it ;  so  also  we  ought  to 
disown  and  shew  a  dislike  of  the  profane  scoffs 
which  some  people  give  to  the  English  antipsedo- 
baptists  merely  for  their  use  of  dipping.  It  is  one 
thing  to  maintain  that  that  circumstance  is  not 
absolutely  necessary  to  the  essence  of  baptism,  and 
another,  to  go  about  to  represent  it  as  ridiculous 
and  foolish,  or  as  shameful  and  indecent ;  when  it 
was  in  all  probability  the  way  by  which  our  blessed 
Saviour,  and  for  certain  was  the  most  usual  and 
ordinary  way  by  which  the  ancient  Christians,  did 

P  Part  i.  chap.  17.  §.  5.  q  Can.  45,  46,  47. 


Dipping  ordinarily  used  in  Baptism.  385 

receive  their  baptism.     1  shall  not  stay  to  produce   chap. 
the  particular  proofs  of  this.     Many  of  the  quota-      ^^- 
tions  which  I  brought  for  other  purposes,  and  shall ^''a'- after 
bring,  do  evince  it.     It  is  a  great  want  of  prudence,  sties!^*" 
as  well  as  of  honesty,  to  refuse  to  grant  to  an  ad- 
versary what  is  certainly  true,  and   may  be  proved 
so.     It  creates   a  jealousy  of  all   the   rest  that  one 
says. 

Before  the  Christian    religion  was   so  far  encou- 
raged as  to  have  churches  built  for  its  service,  they 
baptized    in    any    river,    pond,    &c.      So   Tertullian  loo. 
says'";   '  It  is  all  one  whether  one  be  washed  in  the 
'  sea  or  in  a  pond,  in  a  fountain  or  in  a  river,  in  a 

*  standing  or  in  a  running  water :  nor  is  there  any 
'  difterence  between  those  that  John  ba[)tized  in 
'  Jordan,  and  those  that  Peter  baptized  in  the  river 

*  Tiber.'  But  when  they  came  to  have  churches  ; 
one  part  of  the  church,  or  place  nigh  the  church, 
called  t/ie  baptistery,  was  employed  to  this  use,  and 
had  a  cistern,  font,  or  pond  large  enough  for  seve- 
ral at  once  to  go  into  the  water ;  divided  into  two 
parts  by  a  partition,  one  for  the  men  and  the  other 
for  the  women  for  the  ordinary  baptisms. 

On  the  other  side,  the  antipaedobaptists  will  be 
as  unfair  in  their  turn,  if  they  do  not  grant  that 
in  the  case  of  sickness,  weakliness,  haste,  want  of 
quantity  of  water,  or  such  like  extraordinary  occa- 
sions, bajitism  by  affusion  of  water  on  the  face  was 
by  the  ancients  counted  sufficient  baptism.  I  shall, 
out  of  the  many  proofs  for  it,  produce  two  or  three 
of  the  most  ancient. 

Anno  Dom.  251.      Novatian  was  by  one  party  of 's'- 
the  clergy  and   people  of   Rome  chosen  bishop  of 
■■  De  Baptismo,  c.  4. 

WALL,  VOL.  II.  c  c 


386  Sicl  People  baptized  in  Bed. 

CHAP,  that  church,   in  a  schismatical   way,   and   in  oppo- 

TX 

'      sition  to  Cornelius,  who  had  been  before  chosen  by 


^he^a'^^^"  the  major  part,  and  was  ah-eady  ordained.     Corne- 

sties.  lius  does   in  a  letter  to    Fabius   bishop   of  Antioch 

vindicate  his  riofht :  and  shews  ^  that  Novatian  came 

not  canonically  to   his   orders  of  priesthood ;  much 

less   was   he  capable   of  being   chosen    bishop :    for 

*  that  all  the  clergy,  and  a  great  many  of  the  laity, 
'  were  against  his  being  ordained  presbyter,  because 

*  it  was  not  lawful  (they  said)  for  any  one  that  had 
'  been  baptized  in  his  bed  in  time  of  sickness,  [rov 

*  ev  kXiv)]  Sia  v6(tov  TrepixyOevra,]  as  he  had  been,  to  be 
'  admitted  to  any  office  of  the  clergy.' 

This  shews  that  at  the  time  when  Novatian  turn- 
ed Christian,  which  could  not  by  this  account  be 
120.  much  above  one  hundred  years  after  the  apostles,  it 
was  the  custom  for  any  one  that  in  time  of  sickness 
desired  baptism,  to  have  it  administered  to  him  in 
his  bed  by  affusion  :  as  in  another  part  of  this  letter 
is  said  of  him;    ev    avrtj  rjj    KXlvtj    ^   eKciro    Trepi-^uOel?: 

*  baptized  by  affusion  in  the  bed  as  he  lay.'  It  is 
true,  the  Christians  had  then  a  rule  among  them- 
selves, that  such  an  one,  if  he  recovered,  should 
never  be  ])referred  to  any  office  in  the  church. 
Which  rule  they  made,  not  that  they  thought  that 
manner  of  baptism  to  be  less  effectual  than  the 
other,  but  for  the  reason   expressed  by  the  council 

2 '4- of  Neocsesarea  held  about  eighty  years  after  this 
time ;  the  twelfth  canon  whereof  is  ;  '  He  that  is 
'  baptized  when  he  is  sick,  ought  not   to  be  made 

*  a  priest  (for  his  coming   to  the  faith  is  not  volun- 

*  tary,  but  from  necessity)  unless  his  diligence  and 

s  Euseb.  Hist.  Eccles.  lib.  vi.  cap.  43. 


SicJc  People  baptized  in  Bed.  387 

*  faith    do    afterward    prove    commendable,    or    the   chap- 

*  scarcity  of  men  fit  for  the  office  do  require  it.'  

Another  instance  about  the  same  time  is  this  ;  thrapo-*^ 
one  Magnus,  a  countryman,  writes  to  St.  Cypi'ian  *,  ^'^'?" 
desiring  to  be  satisfied  in  some  points  relating  to 
the  schism  of  the  Novatians.  One  was :  whether 
those  that  were  baptized  in  that  schism  must  be 
baptized  again  if  they  come  over  from  the  schism 
to  the  church  ?  This,  St.  Cyprian  answers,  must  be ; 
because  all  baptism,  given  by  such  as  are  in  a  state 
of  division  from  the  church,  is  void.  The  other 
was  :  wlfether  they  that  in  the  communion  of  the 
church  are  baptized  in  bed,  as  Novatian  was,  must 
likewise  be  baptized  again,  if  they  recover  ?  To  this 
St.  Cyprian  answers  as  follows  : 

'  You  inquire  also,  dear  son,  what  I  think  of  such 
'  as  obtain  the  grace  in   time   of  their  sickness  and 

*  infirmity  ;  whether  they  are  to   be  accounted  law- 

*  ful  Christians,  because  they  are  not  washed  all 
'  over  with  the  water  of  salvation,  but  have  only 
'  some  of  it  poured  on  them.  In  which  matter  I 
'  would  use  so  much  modesty  and  humility,  as  not 
'  to  prescribe  so  positively,  but  that  every  one 
'  should  have  the  freedom  of  his  own  thought,  and 
'  do  as  he  thinks  best.  I  do,  according  to  the  best 
'  of  my  mean   capacity,  judge   thus ;  that    the    di- 

*  vine  favours  are  not  maimed  or  weakened,  so  as 
'  that  any  thing  less  tha.n  the  whole  of  them  is 
'  conveyed,  where  the  benefit  of  them  is  received 
'  with  a  full  and  complete  faith  both  of  the  giver 
'  and  receiver. 

*  For  the  contagion  of  sin  is  not  in  the  sacrament 

t  Cypriani  Epist.  69.  edit.  Oxon.  [76.  edit.  Benedictin.  Paris, 
1726.] 

c  c  2 


388  Baptism  hy  Affusion  sufficient. 

CHAP.  <  of  salvation  washed  off  by  the  same  measures  that 

'  the  dirt  of  the  skin  and  of  the  body  is  washed  off 

the  apo-     *  in  an  ordinary  and  secular  bath ;  so  as  that  there 
^^^^^'         '  should  be   any  necessity  of  soap  and   other  helps, 

*  and  a  large  pool  or  fish-pond   by  which  the  body 

*  is  washed  or  cleansed.  It  is  in  another  way  that 
'  the  breast  of  a  believer  is  washed  ;  after  another 
'  fashion  that  the  mind  of  a  man  is  by  faith  cleans- 

*  ed.  In  the  sacraments  of  salvation,  when  neces- 
'  sity  compels,  the  shortest  ways  of  transacting 
'  Divine  matters  do,  by  God's  gracious  dispensation, 

*  confer  the  whole  benefit.  '*' 

'  And  no  man  need  therefore  think  otherwise, 
'  because  these  sick  people,  when  they  receive  the 

*  grace  of  our  Lord,  have   nothing  but   an  affusion 

*  or  sprinkling ;  whenas  the  Holy  Scripture,  by  the 
'  prophet  Ezekiel,  says  ",  Then  will  I  sp^nnkle  dean 
'  water  upon  you,  and  ye  shall  be  clean^  &c. 

He  quotes  to  the  same  purpose.  Numb.  xix.  13, 
and  viii.  7,  &c.  And  having  applied  them,  says  a 
little  after ;  '  If  any  one  think  that  they  obtain  no 
'  benefit,  as  having  only  an  affusion  of  the  water  of 
'  salvation,  do  not  let  him  mistake  so  far,  as  that 
'  the  parties,  if  they  recover  of  their  sickness,  should 
'  be  baptized  again.  And  if  they  must  not  be  bap- 
'  tized  again,  that  have  already  been  sanctified  with 

*  the  baptism  of  the  church  ;  why  should  they  have 

*  cause  of  scandal  given  them  concerning  their  reli- 

*  gion  and   the  pardon  of  our   Lord?  What!  shall 

*  we  think  that  they  have  granted  to  them  the 
'  grace  of  our  Lord,  but  in  a  weaker  or  less  measure 

*  of  the  divine  and  Holy  Spirit ;  so  as  to  be  account- 
'  ed    Christians,    but  yet  not  in   equal    state    with 

u  Exek.  xxxvi.  25. 


Baptism  hy  Affusion  sufficient.  389 

*  others  ?    No:    the   Holy   Spirit    is    not    given    by  chap. 

*  several  measures,  but  is   wholly  poured   on  them  ^__L_ 


*  that  believe,'  &c.  X^^"^  ^ft^^- 

the  apo- 

And  having,  in  order  to  set  forth   this  equality,  sties, 
alluded    to  what   is    said,  Exod.  xvi.  18,    of   every 
man's  having  an  equal  homer  of  manna,  he  adds ; 
by  which  it  was  signified  that  the  mercy  and  hea- 
venly grace  of  Christ  which  was  to  come  in  after- 
times  would  be  divided  equally  to  all ;  and  the  gift 
of  the  spiritual  grace  would  be  poured  on  all  God's 
people  without  any  difference  on  account  of  sex 
or  years  of  age,'   [which  words  are  another  proof 
of  his  owning  infant-baptism,]    or    of  respect    of 
persons.' 
'  We  see,'  says  he,  '  this  proved  by  the  experience 
of  the   thing:   that   such   as   are  baptized  and  do 
obtain  the  grace  in  their  sickness,  when  need  so 
requires,  are   freed   from   the   unclean   spirit   with 
which  they  were    before    possessed ;    and   do   live 
commendably  and  approved  in  the  church,  and  do 
every  day  proceed  by  the  increase  of  their  faith  to 
an  increase  of  the  heavenly  grace,'  &c. 
A  little  after,  he  argues  thus  ;  '  Can  any  one  think 
it  reasonable  that  so  much  honour  should  be  shew- 
ed to  the  heretics,  that  such  as  come   from  them 
should  never  be  asked  whether  they  had  a  washing 
all    over,  or  only  an   affusion  of  water;    and   yet 
among  us  any  should  detract  from  the  truth  and 
integrity  of  faith  V  &c.     So  that   it  appears,  that 
the  several  sects  did,  as  well  as  the  church-party, 
use  clinical  baptism  in  case  of  necessity.  158. 

The  Acts  also  of  St.  Laurence,  who  suffered  mar- 
tyrdom about  the  same  time  as  Cyprian,  do  tell 
how  one  of  the  soldiers  that  were  to  be  his  execu- 


390  Baptism  by  Affusion  sufficient. 

CHAP,   tioners,  being  converted,  brought  a  pitcher  of  water 
'      for   Laurence   to   baptize   him   with.     And   though 
Ihel^lT  these  Acts,  as  they  are  now,  are  interpolated   and 
sties.         mixed  with  falsehoods'' ;  yet  this  passage  seems  to 
be  genuine,  because  it  is  cited  by  Walafridus  Strabo-^, 
who  lived  before  those  times  in  which  most  of  the 
Roman  forgeries  were  added  to  the  histories  of  their 
saints. 
^3°-      Eusebius^    also    mentions    Basilides    baptized    in 
prison  by  some  brethren.     The  strict  custody  under 
which  Christian  prisoners  were  kept,  their  tyranni- 
cal jailors  hardly  allowing  them  necessaries  for  life, 
much  less  such  conveniences  as  they  desired  for  their 
religion,  makes  it  very  probable  that  this  must  have 
been  done  by  affusion  only  of  some  small  quantity 
of  water.     And  the  like  may  be  said  of  the  jailor 
baptized  by  St.  Paul  in  haste,  the  same  hour  of  the 
night,  (in  which  he  was  converted,)  he  and  all  his^ 
straightway  ^. 

These  are  some  of  the  most  ancient  instances  of 
that  sort  of  baptism  that  are  now  extant  in  records. 
But  the  further  one  proceeds  in  reading  the  follow- 
ing times,  the  more  frequent  they  are :  insomuch 
^9^' that  Gennadius'^  of  Marseilles  in  the  fifth  century 
speaks  of  baptism  as  given  in  the  French  church  in- 
differently, by  either  of  the  ways,  of  immersion  or 
aspersion.  For  having  said,  '  we  believe  the  way 
'  of  salvation  to  be  open  only  to  baptized  persons ; 

X  [See  these  extended  to  the  length  of  fifty  folio  pages,  in  the 
Acta  Sanctorum,  at  the  loth  day  of  August.] 

>'  De  Rebus  Ecclesiast.  cap.  26.  [See  some  account  of  this 
author  above,  at  p.  13  of  this  volume.] 

z  Hist.  Eccl.  lib.  vi.  cap.  5.  a  Acts  xvi.  33. 

^  De  Eccles.  Dogmatibus,  cap.  74, 


'  we  believe  that  no  catechumen,  though  he  die  in   chap. 


Baptism  hy  Affusion  sufficient.  391 

that  no  catechumen,  though  he  die  in 

*  good  works,  has  eternal  life ;'  he  adds  ;  '  except 
'  the  case  of  martyrdom,  in  which  all  the  sacraments  thTapo-^'^ 

*  of  baptism    are    completed.'     Then,  to   shew  how**^*^^- 
martyrdom  has  all  in  it  that  baptism  has,  he  says ; 

'  the  person  to  be  baptized  owns  his  faith  before  the 
'  priest :  and  when  the  interrogatories  are  put  to 
'  him,  makes  his  answer.  The  same  does  a  martyr 
'  before  the  heathen  judge  :  he  also  owns  his  faith ; 
'  and  when  the  question  is  put  to  him,  makes  an- 
'  swer.  The  one  after  his  confession  is  either  wetted 
'  with  the  water,  or  else  plunged  into  it ;  and  the 
'  other  is  either  wetted  with  his  own  blood,  or  else 
'  is  plunged  [or  overwhelmed]  in  fire.' 

In  the  times  of  Thomas  Aquinas  and  Bona- 1155- 
venture,  immersion  was  in  Italy  the  most  common 
way  ;  but  the  other  was  ordinary  enough.  Thomas 
speaks  thus'";  'baptism  may  be  given  not  only  by 
'  immersion,  but  also  by  affusion  of  water,  or  sprink- 
'  ling  with  it.  But  it  is  the  safer  way  to  baptize 
'  by  immersion,  because  that  is  the   most  common 

*  custom.'     And  again  :  '  by  immersion  the  burial  of 

*  Christ  is   more  lively  represented ;    and   therefore 

*  this  is  the  most  common  and  commendable  way.' 
Bonaventure  says'\  that  the  way  of  affusion  was 
probably  used  by  the  a])ostles,  and  was  in  his  time 
used  in  the  churches  of  France,  and  some  others  : 
but  he  says ;  the  way  of  dipping  into  the  water  is 
'  the  more  common,  and  the  fitter,  and  the  safer.' 

One  would  have  thought  that  the  cold  countries 
should  have  been  the  first  that  should  have  changed 
the  custom  from  dipping  to  affusion,  because  in  cold 

c  Part.  iii.  Qusest.  66.  Art.  7. 

d  In  librum  iv.  Sententiarum,  Distinct.  3.  Art.  2.  Qusest.  2. 


392  Baptism  hy  Affusion  sufficient. 

CHAP,  climates  the  bathing  of  the  body  in  water  may  seem 
___1__  much  more  unnatural  and  dangerous  to  the  health 


Year  after  ^\-^^^  '^^  ^|jg  j^q^  Q^^gg .  /^nd  it  is  to  be  uoted  by  the 

the  apo-  ^  ^  • 

sties.  way,  that  all  those  countries  of  whose  rites  of  bap- 

tism, and  immersion  used  in  it,  we  have  any  account 
in  the  Scripture,  or  other  ancient  history,  are  in  hot 
climates  ;  where  frequent  and  common  bathing  both 
of  infants  and  grown  persons  is  natural,  and  even 
necessary  to  the  health).  But  by  history  it  appears, 
that  the  cold  climates  held  the  custom  of  dipping  as 
long  as  any;  for  England,  which  is  one  of  the 
coldest,  was  one  of  the  latest  that  admitted  this 
alteration  of  the  ordinary  way.  Vasquez*^  having  said 
that  it  was  the  old  custom  both  in  the  East  and  the 
West  to  baptize  both  grown  persons  and  infants,  that 
were  in  health,  by  immersion  :  and  that  it  plainly  ap-r 
pears  by  the  words  of  St.  Gregory,  that  the  custom 
49°-  continued  so  to  be  in  his  time,  adds;  'and  it  continues, 
'  as  they  say,  to  this  day  among  the  English,  as 
'  Erasmus  has  noted  in  the  margin  of  the  76th 
*  Epistle  of  St.  Cyprian.'  Erasmus  is  there  observing 
how  the  baptism  of  infants  is  in  different  countries 
variously  administered :  and  says ;  *  perfunduntur 
'  apud  nos,  merguntur  apud  Anglos.'  '  With  us  [the 
'  Dutch]  they  have  the  water  poured  on  them  :  in 
'  England  they  are  dipped.'  Therefore  it  is  probable 
that  Erasmus  wrote  his  Colloquy  called  i)(dvo(payia 
in  England.  In  which  he  says ;  '  we  dip  children 
'  newly  come  forth  from  their  mothers'  womb,  all 
^  over  into  cold  water,  which  has  stood  a  long  time 
'  in  a  stone  font :  I  will  not  say,  till  it  stinks.'  This 
is  a  good  authority  for  so  late  as  the  time  of 
Henry  Vlllth,  at  which  time  he  lived  in  England, 

e  In  Tertiam  Partem  S.  Thomee,  Disput.  145.  cap.  2. 


Dipping  when  left  off  in  the  West.  393 

And  I  produced  before^  a  passage  out  of  a  convoca-  chap. 
tioii  in  that  king's  reign,  which  also  shews  that  the 


general  custom  in  Ens^land  then  was  to  dip  infants.  V™'"  ^f'^"" 
And  it  continued  so  for  two  reigns  more.  sties. 

I  will  here  endeavour  to  trace  the  times  when  ''^^  ' 
it  began  to  be  left  off  in  the  several  countries  of  the 
west :  meaning  still,  in  the  case  of  infants  that  were 
in  health,  and  in  the  public  baptism;  for  in  the 
case  of  sickly  or  weak  infants,  there  was  always, 
in  all  countries,  an  allowance  of  affusion  or  sprink- 
ling, to  be  given  in  haste,  and  in  the  house,  or  any 
other  })lace. 

France  seems  to  have  been  the  first  country  in 
the  world,  where  baptism  by  affusion  was  used 
ordinarily  to  persons  in  health,  and  in  the  public 
way  of  administering  it.  Gennadius  of  Marseilles,  395- 
whose  words  I  gave  before  &,  is  the  first  author  that 
speaks  of  it  as  indifferent. 

It  came  more  and  more  into  request  in  that 
country,  till  in  Bonaventure's  time  it  was  become,  u^o. 
as  appears  by  his  words  last  quoted,  a  very  ordi- 
nary practice  :  and  though  he  say,  some  other 
churches  did  then  so  use  it,  yet  he  names  none  but 
France. 

The  synod  of  Anglers,  1275,  speaks  of  dipping  or  1175. 
pouring,  as  indifferently  used ;  and  blames  some 
ignorant  priests,  for  that  they  dip  or  pour  the  water 
but  once  :  and  instructs  them  that  the  general  cus- 
tom of  the  church  is  to  dip  thrice,  or  pour  on  water 
three  times. 

The   synod    of   Langres  mentions   pouring   only ;  T304. 
*  Let  the  priest  make  three  pourings  or  sprinklings 
•'  of  water  on  the  infant's  head,'  &c. 

f  Ch.  viii.  §.  6.  ^  [At  page  390.] 


394  Dippinq  when  left  off  in  the  West, 

CHAP.       And  so  from  thence  to  the  year  1600,  (and  still 

' to  this   day  for   ought   I  know,)  the  synodical  acts 

thTapo^'^'^  and  canons  of  the  churches  in  France  do  mention, 
sties.  sometimes  dipping  or  pouring,  and  sometimes  pour- 
ing only:  but  the  practice  for  a  long  time  has  been 
1485  pouring  only.  The  synod  of  Aix,  1585,  says,  '  pour- 
'  ing  or  dipping,  according  as  the  use  of  the  church 
'  is  ;'  and  orders,  that  '  the  pouring  of  the  water  be 
'  not  done  with  the  hand,  but  with  a  ladle  [or  vessel] 
'  kept  in  the  font  for  that  purpose.'  This  account 
of  the  synods  I  have  out  of  Bochelli  Decreta  Eccles. 
Gallicance,  lib.  ii.  de  baptismo^. 

From  France  it  spread  (but  not  till  a  good  while 
after)  into  Italy,  Germany,  Spain,  &c.,  and  last  of 
all  into  England. 

For  Italy  :  I   have  shewn  already,  that  dipping 

n6o  was   the  more   ordinary   custom  at   the  year   1260. 

By  what  degrees  it  altered,  is  not  worth  the  while 

to  search.     In  two   hundred  years'  time   the   other 

became  the  ordinary  way. 

In  Germany,  Walafridus  Strabo,  850,  Rupertus, 
1120,  and  several  others,  do  so  speak  of  baptism, 
as  that  it  appears  by  their  words,  that  dipping  of 
infants  was  the  general  custom  ;  except  of  such  as 
1436.  were  sick,  &c.,  and  must  be  baptized  in  haste.  But 
the  council  of  Cologne  under  Herman,  in  the  year 
1536,  speaks  of  it  more  indifferently  :  '  The  child  is 
*  thrice  either  dipped,  or  wetted,  with  the  water,'&c. 
And  fifteen  years  after,  the  Agenda  '  of  the  church  of 

^  [Folio,  Paris,  1609.] 

i  [See  '  Agenda  Ecclesise  Moguntinensis,  per  D.  Sebastianutn, 
'  Archiepiscopum  Moguntinum/  &c.  folio,  Moguntite,  [551.  The 
same  book  had  been  published  previously,  namely  in  the  year 
1480.     Sebastian  made  some  slight  additions  to  it.] 


In  France  and  Germany.  895 

Mentz,  published  by  Sebastian,  do  recommend  and  chap. 
prefer  the  latter :  '  Then  let  the  priest  take  the  __ll_ 
'  child  in   his  left  arm;  and   holding  him   over  the  \'^^'' ^^'^"^ 

tllC  B.pO- 

*  font,  let  him  with  his  right  hand  three  several  sties. 
'  times  take  water  out  of  the  font,  and  pour  it  on''^^'" 
'  the    child's  head,    ita   quod   aqua    tingat   caput    et 

'  scapulas,  so  as  that  the  water  may  wet  its  head 
'  and  shoulders.'  Then  they  give  a  note  to  this 
purpose ;  that  immersion,  once  or  thrice,  or  pouring 
of  M  ater,  may  be  used,  and  have  been  used,  in  the 
church :  and  that  this  variety  does  not  alter  the 
nature  of  baptism  :  and  that  a  man  shall  do  ill  to 
break  the  custom  of  his  church  for  either  of  them. 
But  they  add,  that  it  is  better,  if  the  church  will 
allow,  to  use  pouring  on  of  water.  For  suppose, 
say  they,  the  priest  be  old  and  feeble,  or  have  the 
palsy  in  his  hands,  or  the  weather  be  very  cold,  or 
the  child  very  infirm,  or  be  too  big  to  be  dipped  in 
the  font ;  then  it  is  much  fitter  to  use  affusion  of 
the  water.  Then  they  bring  the  instance  of  the 
apostles  baptizing  three  thousand  at  a  time,  the  in- 
stance of  St.  Laurence,  that  I  spoke  of  before,  and 
the  story  (which  I  suppose  is  forged)  of  Chlodoveus, 
baptized  in  that  fashion  by  Remigius :  and  say; 
'  That  therefore  there  may  not  be  one  way  for  the 

*  sick,  and  another  for  the  healthy  ;  one  for  children, 

*  and  another  for  bigger  persons ;  it  is  better  that 
'  the  minister  of  this  sacrament  do  keep  the  safest 
'  way,  which  is,  to  pour  water  thrice  :  unless  the 
'  custom  be  to  the  contrary.' 

In  England  there  seem  to  have  been  some  priests 
so  early  as  the  year  816,  that  attempted  to  bring  in  716. 
the  use  of  baptism   by   affusion  in  the    public   ad- 
minstration  ;  for  Spelman  recites  a  canon  of  a  council 


396  Dipping  how  long  continued 

CHAP,  in  that  year'^,   '  Let  the  priests  know,  that  when 
they  administer  holy  baptism,  they  must  not  pour 


thrapo-'^'^  '  the    water  on  the  head  of  the  infants :    but  they 
sties.         <■  jjiust  always  be  dipped  in  the  font.     As  the  Son  of 
'  God  gave  his  own  example  to  all  believers,  when 
'  he    was    thrice  dipped   in  the  waters    of  Jordan  ; 
'  so  it  is  necessary  by  order  to  be  kept  and  used.' 
Lyndewode,  who  was  dean  of  the   arches   in  the 
'322.  time  of  Henry  V.  1422,  and  wrote  the  best  account 
of  our  English  Constitutions,  having  spoken   of  the 
manner  of  baptizing  infants  by   dipping,   adds  this 
note ' ;  '  But  this  is  not  to  be  accounted  to  be  of  the 
'  necessity  [or  essence]   of  baptism  :  but  it  may  be 
'  given  also    by   pouring    or    sprinkling.     And    this 
'  holds  especially  where  the  custom  of  the  church 
'  allows  it.'     It   is   to  be   noted,   that   France  had, 
as  I   shewed  just  now,  before  this  time,  admitted 
of  the   way  of  pouring  water ;  and  Lyndewode  had 
lived  in  France  under  Henry  the  Fifth  of  England, 
who  was  king  there. 
1280.      Some  do  prove  from  Wickliffe,  that  it  was  held 
indifferent  in  England,  in  his  time,  whether  dipping 
or  pouring  were  used  :  because  he  says  at  one  place, 
'  Nor   is  it  material   whether  they  be   dipped  once 
*  or  thrice,  or  water  be  poured  on  their  heads :  but 
'  it  must  be  done  according  to   the   custom  of  the 
'  place  where  one  dwells  ™.'     But  we  ought  to  take 
the  whole  context  as   it  lies  in  his  book.      He  had 
been  speaking  of  the  necessity  of  baptism  to  salva- 

^  Concil.  Anglicana,  torn.  i.  pag.  331.  Synod,  apud  Celecyth. 
sub  Walfredo. 

1  Constit.  lib.  iii.  cap.  de  Baptisrao. 

m  Trialog.  lib.  iv.  cap.  11.  [De  Baptismo.  pag.  118.  edit. 
1525.  4to.] 


in  England.  397 

tion,  from  that  text,  John  iii.  5,  and  then  adds;  *  et  chap. 
'  ordinavit  ecclesia,  quod  quselibet  persona  fidelis  in 


necessitatis  articiilo  poterit  baptizari  [/.  baptizare]  ^le^Lo^''"^ 
Nee  refert,'  &c.     '  And  the  church  has  or-^*^'^*- 


'  dained  that  in  a  case  of  necessity  any  person  that 
'  is  fidel  [or  that  is  himself  baptized]  may  give  bap- 

'  tism,  &ic. Nor  is  it  material  whether  they  be 

'  dipped,'  &c.  Such  words  do  not  suppose  any 
other  way  than  dipping  used  ordinarily :  but  only 
in  a  juncture  of  necessity,  or  fear  of  the  infant's 
death. 

The  offices  or  liturgies  for  public  baptism  in 
the  church  of  England  did  all  along,  so  far  as  I 
can  learn,  enjoin  dipping,  without  any  mention  of 
pouring  or  sprinkling.  The  Mariuale  ad  iisum 
Sammy  printed  1530,  the  21st  of  Henry  Vlllth, '43a- 
orders  thus  for  the  public  baptisms ;  '  then  let  the 
'  priest  take  the  child,  and,  having  asked  the  name, 
'  baptize  him  by  dipping  him  in  the  water  thrice,' 
&c.  And  John  Frith",  writing  in  the  year  1533  a '433- 
Treatise  of  Baptism,  calls  the  outward  part  of  it, 
the  'plunging  down  in  the  water,  and  lifting  up 
'  again.'  Which  he  often  mentions,  without  ever 
mentioning  pouring  or  sprinkling. 

In  the  Common  Prayer  Book  printed  1549,  the  '449- 
second  of  king  Edward  the  Vlth,  the  order  stands 
thus  :  '  shall  dip  it  in  the  water  thrice,  &c. — So  it 
'  be  discreetly  and  warily  done :  saying,  A^.  I  bap- 
'  tize  thee,'  &c.  But  this  order  adds ;  '  and  if  the 
'  child  be  weak,  it  shall  suffice  to  pour  water  upon 
'  it,  soying  the  foresaid  words.'  Afterward,  the 
books  do  leave   out   the  word  thrice:  and  do  say; 

o  [See    '  the    works    of  Tyndal,    Frith,    and    Barnes,'    cited 
ahove.] 


398  Left  off  in  Queen  EUzahetJis  Time. 

CHAP.   '  shall  dip  it  in  the  water,  so  it  be  discreetly,'  &c. 

— —  Which  alteration,  I  suppose",  was  made  in  the  sixth 

theapo-^'^  of  Edward  the  Vlth,  for  then  there  was  a  new  edi- 
sties.         ^JQjj  Qf  ^Y\Q  book  with  some  lisfht  alterations.     And 


1452 


o' 


from  thence  it  stood  unaltered  as  to  this  matter  to 

1562.  the  fourteenth  of  Charles  II. 

From  this  time  of  king  Edward,  Mr.  Walker  P 
(who  has  taken  the  most  pains  in  tracing  this 
matter)  derives  the  beginning  of  the  alteration  of 
the  general  custom.  He  says,  that  '  dipping  was  at 
'  this  time  the  more  usual,  but  sprinkling  was  some- 
'  times  used  :  "  which  M'ithin  the  time  of  half  a  cen- 

H50- '  tury  [meaning  from  1550  to  1600]  prevailed  to 
'  be  the  more  general  (as  it  is  now  almost  the  only) 
*  way  of  baptizing." ' 

But  it  is  not  probable  that  in  so  short  a  reign  as 

»4S3that  of  king  Edward,  Mdio  died  in  1553,  the  custom 
could  receive  any  great  alteration.  Customs,  in 
which  the  whole  body  of  the  people  is  concerned, 
alter  but  slowly,  when  they  do  alter. 

And  in  queen  Mary's  time  the  custom  of  dipping 
seems  to  have  continued.     For  Watson  1,  the  popish 

o  [In  the  edition  of  1549  the  words  are  as  given  by  Wall :  in 
that  of  1552,  the  word  'thrice'  is  omitted,  the  rest  remain  as 
before.  In  that  of  queen  Elizabeth,  published  in  1559,  the 
same.  In  king  James',  of  1607,  the  same.  In  king  Charles', 
1639,  the  same. 

It  may  be  remembered,  that  in  all  these,  even  the  earliest,  we 
find,  in  the  office  for  private  baptism,  a  rubric  enjoining  that 
[first  '  one  of  the  persons  present,'  and  afterwards]  '  the  lawful 
'  minister'  shall  dip  the  child  in  water  or  pour  water  upon  him, 
saying,  &c.] 

p  Doctrine  of  Baptisms,  chap.  x.  p.  147.  [80.  London,  1678.] 

q  ['  See  Holsome  and  Catholyke  doctryne  concerninge  the 
'  seven  Sacramentes  of  Chrystes  Church set  forth  in  maner 


Left  off  in  Queen  Elizabeth's  Time.  399 

bishop  of  Lincoln^  did  in  the  year  1558,  which  was  chap. 
the  last  of  queen   Mary,  pubhsh  a  volume  of  ser-  ' 


mens  about  the  sacraments:  in  the  fourth  of  which  ^'^^'"  ^^t^"^ 

the  apo- 

he  says  ;  '  though  the  okl  and  ancient  tradition  of  sties. 
'  the  church  hath  been  from  the  beginning  to  dip^'*^  ' 
'  the  child  three  times,  &c.  yet  that  is  not  of  such 
«  necessity,  but  that  if  he  be  but  once  dipped  in  the 
'  water,  it  is  sufficient.  Yea,  and  in  time  of  great 
'  peril  and  necessity,  if  the  water  be  but  poured 
'  upon  his  head,  it  will  suffice.'  A  sign,  that  pour- 
ing was  not  in  queen  Mary's  time  used  but  in  case 
of  necessity. 

But  there  are  apparent  reasons  why  that  custom 
should  alter  during  queen  Elizabeth's  reign. 

The  latitude  given  in  the  Liturgy,  which  could 
have  but  little  effect  in  the  short  time  of  king- 
Edward's  reign,  might,  during  the  long  reign  of  this 
queen,  produce  an  alteration  proportionably  greater. 
It  being  allowed  to  weak  children  (though  strong 
enough  to  be  brought  to  church)  to  be  baptized  by 
affusion,  many  fond  ladies  and  gentlewomen  first, 
and  then  by  degrees  the  common  people,  would  ob- 
tain the  favour  of  the  priest  to  have  their  children 
pass  for  weak  children,  too  tender  to  endure  dipping 
in  the  water.  '  Especially,'  (as  Mr.  Walker  ob- 
serves,) '  if  some  instance  really  were,  or  were  but 
'  fancied  and  framed,  of  some  child's  taking  cold  or 
'  being  otherwise  prejudiced  by  its  being  dipped  •■.' 

And  another  thing  that  had  a  greater  influence 
than  this,  was ;  that  many  of  our  English  divines 
and  other  people  had,  during  queen  Mary's  bloody 

'  of  ghort  sermons by  Thomas  [[Watson]  bishop  of  Lin- 

'  cohie.'  40.  London,  1558. — Sermon  iv.  foho22,  23.] 
"■  [Doctrine  of  Baptisms,  p.  147-] 


400  Left  off  in  Queen  Elizabeth's  Time. 

CHAP,  reign,    fled    into    Germany,    Switzerland,   &c.,  and 


'. coming  back  in  queen  Elizabeth's  time,  they  brought 

^l^elpo-^'  with  them  a  great  love  to  the  customs  of  those  pro- 
sties,  testant  churches  wherein  they  had  sojourned :  and 
especially  the  authority  of  Calvin,  and  the  rules 
which  he  had  established  at  Geneva,  had  a  mighty 
influence  on  a  great  number  of  our  people  about 
that  time.  Now  Calvin  had  not  only  given  his  dic- 
tate in  his  Institutions,  •■  that  'the  difference  is  of  no 

*  moment,  whether  he  that  is  baptized  be  dipped  all 
'  over ;  and  if  so,  whether  thrice  or  once  ;  or  whe- 
'  ther  he  be  only  wetted  with  the  water  poured  on 
'  him ;'  but  he  had  also  drawn  up  for  the  use  of  his 
church  at  Geneva  (and  afterwards  published  to  the 

J^-|^' world)  a  form  of  administering  the  sacraments", 
where,  when  he  comes  to  order  the  act  of  baptizing, 
he  words  it  thus  :    '  then  the   minister  of  baptism 

*  pours  water  on  the  infant  ;  saying,  I  baptize 
'  thee,'  &c.  There  had  been,  as  I  said,  some  synods 
in  some  dioceses  of  France  that  had  spoken  of  affu- 
sion without  mentioning  immersion  at  all  ;  that 
being  the  common  practice :  but  for  an  office  or 
liturgy  of  any  church,  this  is,  I  believe,  the  first  in 
the  world  that  prescribes  affusion  absolutely.  Then 
Musculus  had  determined',  '  as  for  dipping  of  the 
'  infant ;  we  judge  that  not  so  necessary,  but  that  it 

*  is  free  for  the  church  to  baptize  either  by  dipping 

r  Lib.  iv.  cap.  15.  §.  19. 

s  Tractat.  Theolog.  Catechismus,  p.  57.  ed,  Bezae,  1576. 
[contained  in  the  eighth  volume  of  Calvin's  works,  folio, 
Amsterdam  edition.] 

t  Loci  Communes  de  Baptismo,  p.  431.  [See  '  Wolfgangi 
'  Musculi  Loci  Communes  Theologise  Sacrse/  folio,  Basilese, 
1^99.  De  Baptismo,  §.  3.  p.  339. — Musculus  confirms  his  judg- 
ment on  the  point  by  quotations  from  Augustine  and  Cyprian.] 


Left  off  in  Queen  Elizabeth'' s  Time.  401 

or  sprinkling.'     So  that  (as  Mr.  Walker  observes")  chap. 
no  wonder  if  that  custom  prevailed  at  home,  which 


*  our  reformed  divines   in   the  time  of  the  Marian j^^^!,')^*^'' 

*  persecution  had  found  to  be  the  judgment  of  other '^'•'^'*- 

*  divines,    and    seen    to    be    the    practice    of  other 

*  churches  abroad  ;  and  especially  of  Mr.  Calvin  and 

*  his  church  at  Geneva.' 

And  when  there  M^as  added  to  all  this  the  resolu- 
tion of  such  a  man  as  Dr.  Whitaker,  Regius  Pro- 
fessor at   Cambridge  ^  '  Though   in   case  of  grown 

*  persons  that  are  in  health,  T  think  dipping  to  be 
"  better ;  yet   in   the  case   of  infants,  and  of  sickly 

*  people,  I  think  sprinkling  sufficient :' — The  inclina- 
tion of  the  people,  backed  with  these  authorities, 
carried  the  practice  against  the  rubric;  which  still 
required  dipping,  except  in  case  of  weakness.  So 
that  in  the  latter  times  of  queen  Elizabeth,  and 
during  the  reigns  of  king  James  and  of  king 
Charles  I,  very  few  children  were  dipped  in  the 
font.  I  have  heard  of  one  or  two  persons  now 
living,  who  must  have  been  born  in  those  reigns, 
that  they  were  baptized  by  dipping  in  the  font ; 
and  of  one  clergyman  now  living,  that  has  baptized 
some  infants  so  :  but  am  not  certain. 

P.  S.  I  have  since  heard  of  several.  And  I  my- 
self have  had  one  opportunity  of  administering  bap- 
tism so,  by  the  parents'  consent.  But  the  children 
were  however  all  that  time  carried  to  the  font. 
As  much  as  to  say  ;  the  minister  is  ready  to  dip  the 
child,  if  the  parents  will  venture  the  health  of  it. 

''  Doctrine  of  Baptism,  ch.  x.  §.  107.  p.  148. 

^  Praelectiones  de  Sacr.  de   Baptismo,   Q.  i.e.  2.  [See  '  Gul. 

*  Whitakeri  Prselectiones  de  Sacramentis  in  genera,'  &c.  4°. 
Francofurtij  1624,  p.  ai6.] 

WALL,   VOL.   XI.  D  d 


402  Left  off  in  Queen  Elizabeth's  Time. 

CHAP.       Mr.  Blake,   who  wrote  in   1645  a  pamphlet  in- 

titled,  '  Infants'  Baptism   freed  from  Antichristiaii- 

the  apo-  ''  '  ism,'  sajs,  p.  1,  (in  answer  to  his  adversary,  who 
^'^''^^  iKA-  ^^^^  ^^i^  ^hat  infants,  pretended  to  be  baptized 
by  the  ministers  of  the  church,  have  not  true  baj)- 
tism,  since  they  are  not  dipped,  but  sprinkled,)  '  I 
'  have  been  an  eyewitness  of  many  infants  dipped  ; 
'  and  know  it   to   have   been   the  constant  practice 

*  of  many  ministers  in  their  places  for  many  years 
'  together.'  And  again,  p.  4,  speaking  of  the  pre- 
sent practice  of  that  time,  says  ;  '  Those  that  dip  not 
'  infants,  do  not  yet  use  to   sprinkle  them :  there  is 

*  a  middle  way  between  these  two :  1  have  seen 
'  several    dipped ;    I    never   saw   nor    heard    of  any 

*  sprinkled,  or  (as  some  of  you  use   to  speak)  ra?i- 

*  tized. Our  way  is  not   by   aspersion,   but   per- 

'  fusion ;  not  sprinkling  drop  by  drop,  but  pouring 
'  on  at  once  all  that  the  hand  contains.'  And  for 
sprinkling  says  ;  '  I  leave  them  to  defend  it,  that 
'  use  it.' 

Of  what  age  Mr.  Blake  was  when  he  wrote  this, 
I  know  not ;  but  in  a  pamphlet  which  he  wrote  the 
year  before,  viz.  1644,  called  'The  Birth  Privilege V 
and  which  he  dedicates  to  his  parishioners  of  Tam- 
worth  in  Staffordshire,  he  so  speaks  as  that  one 
may  guess  him  to  have  been  about  forty-two  years 
old.     He  says  in  the  said  Dedication,  '  I  have  served 

*  you  for  Christ  a  double  apprenticeship  of  years 
'  almost  complete  :  which  time  hath  seemed  to  some 
'  to  have  added  more  than   a  third  to  the  years  of 

2  ['  The  Birth  Privilege ;  or  Covenant-hohness  of  Believers 
'  and  their  issue  in  the  time  of  the  Gospel.  Together  with  the 
.  right  of  Infants  to  Baptism.  By  Thomas  Blake,  Master  of 
'  Arts.'  40.  London,  1644,  pp.  33.] 


The  Font  changed  for  a  Bason.  403 

*  the  days  of  my  pilgrimage.'     What   he   means  by  chap. 

*  seems  to  some,'  I  cannot  imagine.     But  if  he  at       ^^' 
1644   were   about   forty-two,   and    could    remember  Y"'"'''^"''" 

,  IT  the  apo- 

as  he  says  ;  the  dippmg  of  infants  must  have  been  ^tJes. 
pretty  ordinary  during  the  former  half  of  king 
James'  reign,  if  not  longer.  And  for  sprinkling, 
properly  called,  it  seems  it  was  at  1645  just  then 
beginning,  and  used  by  very  few.  It  must  have 
begun  in  the  disorderly  times  after  1641 ;  for 
Mr.  Blake  had  never  used  it,  nor  seen  it  used. 

But    then   came    the    Directory  \    which    forbids  'S44- 
even  the  carrying  of  the  child  to  the  font ;  and  says, 
'  Baptism   is    to    be    administered,    not    in   private 

*  places,  or  privately,'  (these  are  the  men  that  have 
since  brought  baptism  in  private  houses  to  be  so 
spreading  a  custom  as  it  is,)  '  but  in  the  place  of 
'  public  worship,  and  in  the  face  of  the   cong-reo-a- 

*  tion,  &c. — And  not  in   the  places  where  fonts   in 

*  the  time  of  popery  were  unfitly  and  superstitiously 
'  placed.'  So  (parallel  to  the  rest  of  their  reforma- 
tions) they  reformed  the  font  into  a  bason.  This 
learned  assembly  could  not  remember  that  fonts  to 
baptize  in  had  been  always  used  by  the  primitive 
Christians,  long  before  the  beginning  of  popery, 
and  ever  since  churches  were  built :  but  that  sprink- 
ling, for  the  common  use  of  baptizing,  was  really 
introduced  (in  France  first,  and  then  in  the  other 
popish  countries)  in  times  of  popery  :  and  that  ac- 
cordingly all  those  countries,  in  which  the  usurped 
power  of  the  pope  is,  or  has  formerly  been  owned, 
have   left  off  dipping  of  children  in  the  font:   but 

a  [See  '  A  Directory  for  the  Public  Worship  of  God,  &c.  to- 
'  gether  with  an  ordinance  of  Parliament  for  taking  away  the 
'  Book  of  Common  Prayer.'  40,  London,  1644,  p.  39,  40,  45.] 

D  d  2 


404  The  Order  of  the  Church  about  Dipping. 

CHAP,   that  all    other  countries   in  the  world   (which  had 

never  regarded   his   authority)  do   still  use  it :  and 

theapo-"  that  basons,  except  in  case  of  necessity,  were  never 
sties.  \x^ex\_  by  papists,  or  any  other  Christians  whatsoever, 
till  by  themselves. 

The  use  was :  the  minister  continuing  in  his 
reading  desk,  the  child  was  brought  and  held  below 
him ;  and  there  was  placed  for  that  use  a  little 
bason  of  water,  about  the  bigness  of  a  syllabub-pot, 
into  which  the  minister  dipping  his  fingers,  and 
then  holding  his  hand  over  the  face  of  a  child,  some 
drops  would  fall  from  his  fingers  on  the  child's  face. 
For  the  Directory  says,  it  is  '  not  only  lawful,  but 
most  expedient'  to  use  pouring  or  sprinkling. 

Upon  the  review  of  the  Common  Prayer  Book, 
_:^t  the  restauration,  the  church  of  England  did  not 
think  fit  (however  prevalent  the  custom  of  sprink- 
ling was)  to  forego  their  maxim  ;  that  it  is  most 
fitting  to  dip  children  that  are  well  able  to  bear  it. 
But  they  leave  it  wholly  to  the  judgment  of  the 
godfathers  and  those  that  bring  the  child,  whether 
the  child  may  well  endure  dipping,  or  not ;  as  they 
are  indeed  the  most  proper  judges  of  that.  So  the 
priest  is  now  ordered,  *  If  the  godfathers  do  certify 
'  him  that  the  child  may  well  endure  it,  to  dip  it  in 
'  the  water  discreetly  and  warily.  But  if  they  cer- 
*  tify  that  the  child  is  weak,  it  shall  suffice  to  pour 
'  water  upon  it.'  The  difference  is  only  this:  by 
the  rubric  as  it  stood  before,  the  priest  was  to  dip, 
unless  there  were  an  averment  or  allegation  of 
weakness.  Now  he  is  not  to  dip,  unless  there  be  an 
averment  or  certifying  of  strength  sufficient  to 
endure  it. 

Except  such  antipgedobaptists  as  do  not  allow  of 


The  Order  of  the  Church  about  Dipping.  405 

affusion   in   any  case,    (and   I  think   there  are   few  chap. 
such  but  in  England,)  all  the  rest  of  the  world  will      ^^' 
agree  that  this  order  is   the   most  unexceptionable  Y*'-'''"^^^^'' 
of  any  that  could  be  given;  and  does  keep  as  close  sties. 
to  the  primitive  way  as  the  coldness  of  our  region, 
and  the  tenderness  to  which  infants  are  now  used, 
will    admit.     But    in    the    practice,   the    godfathers 
take   so  much  advantage   of  the   reference  that    is 
made  to  their  judgment,  that  they  never  do  certify 
the  priest  '  that  the  child  may  well  endure  it :'  and 
the  priests  do  now  seldom  ask  that  question.     And 
indeed  it  is  needless,  because  they  do  always  bring 
the  child  so  dressed  in  clothes,  as  to  make  it  plain 
that  they  do  not  intend  it  shall  be  dipped.      When 
dipping   in  the  font   was  in   fashion,    they   brought 
the  child  wrapped  up  in  such  a  sort  of  clothing  as 
could  presently  and  without  trouble  be    taken  off, 
and  put  on  again.     I  think  they  called  it  a  cliry- 
som^,  or  some  such  name.     And  besides,  the  fonts 

'"  [The  chrisome  (or  more  properly  chrisome- cloth,  being  that 
which  is  worn  specially  for  the  purpose  of  receiving  the  bap- 
tismal chrism  or  anointing)  denotes  strictly  a  piece  of  white 
linen  or  cloth,  in  which  infants  were  robed,  immediately  after 
being  baptized,  and  before  they  were  anointed.  The  rubric  in 
the  first  Service-book  of  Edward  Vlth,  printed  1549,  directs 
that  at  the  aforesaid  period  of  the  baptismal  ceremony,  '  the 
'  minister  shall  put  upon  hym  [the  child]  hys  whyte  vesture 
'  commonly  called  the  chrisome,  and  say,  "  Take  this  whyte 
'  vesture  for  a  token  of  the  innocency,  which  by  God's  grace 
'  in  this  holy  sacramente  of  baptisme  is  geven  unto  thee ;  and 
'  for  a  sygne  whereby  thou  arte  admonished,  so  long  as  thou 
'  livest,  to  geve  thyself  to  innocencie  of  living,  that  after  thys 
'  transitory  lyfe  thou  mayest  be  partaker  of  the  life  everlasting. 
*  Amen." 

A  subsequent  rubric  enjoins,  that  the  minister  '  shall  com- 
'  maunde  that  the   Crisomes  bee  broughte  to  the  churche,  and 


406  Learned  Men  plead  for  the 

CHAP,  that  have  been  built  since  the  times  I  spoke  of,  are, 

^^'      many  of  them,  built  so  small  and  bason-like,  that 

Year  after  ^  ^|^jjj  cauuot  Well  be  dipped  in  them,  if  it  were 

the  apo- 
stles, desired. 

Since  the  times  that  dipping  of  infants  has  been 

generally  left  off,  many  learned  men  in  several  coun- 

'  delivered  to  the  priestes  after  the  accustomed  manner,  at  the 
'  purificacyon  of  the  mother  of  everye  chylde.' 

N.  B.  This  latter  clause  will  explain  the  sentence  quoted  by 
Nares  in  his  Glossary,  out  of  an  old  play,  called  the  City 
Match  : 

'  The  preacher 
'  is  sent  for  to  a  churching,  and  doth  ask 
'  if  you  be  ready  :  he  shall  lose,  he  says, 
*  his  chrysome  else.' 
This  ceremony  being  abolished  at  the  revisal  of  our  Liturgy 
in  1 55 1,  the  foregoing  rubrics  do  not  appear  in  the  edition  of 
1552,  nor  in  any  subsequent  ones. 

It  is  obvious  that  the  chrysome  is  the  '  chrismale,'  '  vestis 
'  chrismalis,*  or  '  pannus  chrismalis'  of  the  Romish  Liturgy ; 
from  which  indeed,  the  name,  the  custom,  and  in  consequence 
the  rubrics,  were  derived.  The  following  directions,  given  to 
the  baptismal  sponsors,  in  an  old  '  Manuale  secundum  usum 
'  Ecclesise  Sarum,'  are  curious  in  themselves,  and  to  the  point ; 
'  Godfaders  and  Godmoders  of  this  chylde  ;  we  charge  you  that 
'  ye  charge  the  fader  and  the  moder  to  kepe  it  from  fyer  and 
'  water,  and  other  perilles,  to  the  age  of  vii  yeres.  And  that  ye 
'  lerne,  or  set  to  lerne,  the  Paternoster,  Ave  Maria,  and  Credo, 
'  after  the  lawe  of  ail  holy  churche,  and  in  all  godly  haste  to  be 
'  confermed  of  my  lorde  of  the  diocese,  or  of  his  depute ;  and 
'  that  the  moder  bringe  agen  the  crysom  at  hyr  puryfvcation  : 
'  and  wasche  youre  hande  or  ye  departe  the  churche.'  [fol. 
Antwerpise  (circa  1530)  fol.  296.] 

A  chrysome- child,  and  sometimes  simply  '  a  chrysome,'  was 
anciently  used  to  denote  a  child  which  died  within  the  first 
month.  And  Nares  informs  us,  that  in  some  parts  of  England, 
the  metaphor  is  extended  to  a  calf  killed  before  it  be  a  month 
old,  which  is  familiarly  termed  a  chrysome  calf -I 


restoring  of  Dipping.  407 

tries  have  endeavoured   to   retrieve   the  use   of  it:   chap. 

IX 

but  more  in   England  than  any  where  else  in  pro- 


,  •    „  Year  after 

portion.  jhe  apo- 

Sotus    gives    his   opinion  ^  that    'baptism    ought  sties. 

*  still  to  be  given  by  dipping ;  so  as  that  it  is  not 
'  lawful  to  give  it  otherwise,  unless  for  some  neces- 
'  sary,  or  creditable,  and  reasonable  cause.'  But 
Vasquez^  takes  him  up  for  this  with  some  anger; 
and  he  maintains  that  nowadays,  since  it  is  grown 
the  common  custom,  affusion  is  perfectly  as  well  as 
dipping.     This  he  says  of  affusion,  or  '  pouring  on 

*  of  water :'   but   for  sprinkling    of  water,   he   says,  hqs- 
'  That  is  not  at  all  in  use,  and  so  cannot  be  prac- 

*  tised  without  sin,  unless  for  some  particular  cause.' 
Estius  also  does  much  commend  dipping:  but  now 
that  the  other  is  the  common  custom,  would  have 
nothing  altered. 

In  Ensfland  Mr.  Mede  shewed  his  inclination  to 
retrieve  the  ancient  custom  plain  enough,  (indeed 
he  carried  the  argument  for  it  too  far,)  when  he 
said^  that  '  there  was  no  such  thing  as  sprinkling, 

*  or  papTicriuio?,  used  in  baptism  in  the  apostles'  times, 
'  nor  many  ages  after  them.'  If  he  takes  sprinkling 
strictly,  (as  it  is  distinguished  from  pouring  on  of 
water,)  it  may  be  true ;  but  if  he  say  so  of  pouring 
water,  it  is  not  true,  unless  he  limit  it  to  ordinary 
cases. 

Bishop  Taylor,  in  his   Rule  of  Conscience,   and 

c  In  4.  Dist.  3.  q.  unica,  Art.  7.  [See  Dominici  a  Soto,  Se- 
gobiensis  Theologi,  in  quartum  Sententiarum  commentarii,  folio. 
Duaci,  1613.] 

d  In  tertiam  partem  Thomse,  Disput.  145.  cap.  2. 

e  Diatribe  on  Titus  iii.  5.  [Works,  p.  63.  folio.] 


408  Learned  Men  plead  for  the 

CHAP,  also  Mr.  Dan.  Rogers^  in  his  Treatise  of  Sacra- 
__1J__  ments,  have  said  so  much  on  this  head,  that 
Year  after  Danvers  the  antipaedobaptist   catches  hold  of  their 

the  apo-  '  ^ 

sties.  words,  and  brings  them  among  his  authorities  &,  that 

to  baptize  is  nothing  else  but  to  dip.  But  he  is 
forced  to  curtail  and  misrepresent  their  words ;  for 
they  do  both  of  them  in  their  own  words  (which  he 
has  left  out)  own,  that  baptism  by  affusion  is  true 
baptism.  But  so  much  is  true,  that  they  do  both 
of  them  plead  hard  that  it  ought  not  to  be  used  but 
in  case  of  necessity,  and  that  the  ministers  should 
in  no  other  case  dispense  with  the  act  of  immersion. 
And  indeed,  as  the  rubric  then  stood,  it  required 
immersion  positively,  unless  the  child  were  weak. 
Here  by  the  way  I  cannot  but  take  notice  how  much 
trouble  such  an  adventurous  author  as  this  Danvers 
is  able  to  give  to  such  a  careful  and  exact  answerer 
as  Mr.  Walker.  Danvers  does  in  this  place  deal 
with  above  twenty  other  writers  after  the  same  rate 
as  he  does  with  the  two  I  mentioned ;  viz.  Scapula, 
Stephanus,  Pasor,  Vossius,  Leigh,  Casaubon,  Beza, 
Chamier,  Hammond,  Cajetan,  Musculus,  Piscator, 
Calvin^  Keckerman,  Diodatus,  Grotius,  Davenant, 
Tilenus,  Dr.  Cave,  Wal.  Strabo,  and  archbishop 
Tillotson.  He  does  in  the  space  of  twelve  pages ^ 
quote  all  these,  in  such  words  as  if  they  had  made 
dipping  to  be  of  the  essence  of  baptism.  Mr.  Walker 
shews  that  he  has  abused  every  one  of  them  ;  by 

'"  [See  a  Treatise  of  the  two  Sacraments  of  the  Gospel,  Bap- 
tisms and  the  Supper  of  the  Lord.  By  D.  R.  [Daniel  Rogers]. 
4to.  London,  1633.  Again,  third  edition,  4to.  1636.] 

§■  Treatise  of  Baptism,  part  ii.  ch.  iv. 

h  Ibid,  from  page  192,  to  page  204. 


restoring  of  Dipping.  409 

affixinsf  to  some  of  them  words  that  they  never  said,  chap. 

IX 

by  adding  to  others,  by  altering  and  mistranslating 


others,  and  by  curtailing  the  words  of  the  rest.  J^^g^^JjJ^^*" 
But  what  a  trouble  is  this,  to  go  upon  such  a  man's  s'^^^- 
errand  from  book  to  book,  search  the  chapters, 
(which  he  commonly  names  wrong,)  recite  the  words 
first  as  he  quotes  them,  and  then  as  they  really  are 
in  the  book  ?  This  cost  Mr.  Walker  three  large 
chapters  \  And  what  would  it  have  been  to  answer 
the  whole  book,  which  is  all  of  a  piece?  This  is  the 
book  that  is  so  much  handed  about  among  the 
antipsedobaptists  of  England. 

But  to  go  on  to  mention  some  more  learned  men 
of  England  that  have  wished  for  the  restoring  of 
the  custom  of  dipping  such  infants  as  are  in  health. 
Sir  Norton  Knatchbull  says  thus  ^  ;  *  With  leave  be 
'  it  spoken ;  I  am  still  of  opinion  that  it  would  be 
'  more  for  the  honour  of  the  church,  and  for  the 
'  [peace  and]  security  of  religion,  if  the  old  custom 
'  could  conveniently  be  restored.'  Yet  he  there  de- 
clares himself  fully  satisfied  with  the  lawfulness  of 
the  other  way,  so  far  as  that  nobody  ought  to  doubt 
of  its  being  true  and  full  baptism.  For  avoiding 
the  danger  of  cold,  he  thinks  it  advisable  to  restore 
another  ancient  custom  also,  of  baptizing  only  at 
certain  times  of  the  year,  except  such  infants  as  are 
like  to  die.  But  infants  were,  as  I  shewed  before  ^ 
by  that   ancient  custom  excepted  from  any  obliga- 

i  [See  Walker's  Doctrine  of  Baptisms,  8vo.  1678.]  ch.  xi. 
xii.  xiii. 

k  Annot.  on  i  Pet.  iii.  20.  QSee  '  Animadversiones  in  libros 
'  Novi  Testamenti,'  &c.  Bvo.  1659.  The  word  pacem  does  not 
occur  in  the  passage.] 

I  Part  i.  ch.  xvii.  §.3. 


410  Learned  Men  plead  for  the 

[CHAP,   tion  to  stay  till  those  times.     And  Easter  is  in  our 

IX  1 

'. climate  no  very  warm  season.     And  there  is  nothing 

thra-1^'''   commoner  than  for  infants  to  die  suddenly. 
sties.  ^i^  Walker  has   taken   the   most  pains   (I  may 

venture  to  say  it)  of  any  man  in  the  world,  to  shew 
that  baptism  by  pouring,  or  sprinkling,  is  true  bap- 
tism, and  is  valid :  and  that  baptism  so  given  ought 
not  to  be  reiterated  :  and  that  all  ages  of  the  church 
have  been  of  that  opinion  :  and  that  the  antipsedo- 
baptists  have  no  reason  to  separate  on  that  account. 
And  yet  in  the  same  book  he  does  in  several  places 
declare,  that  he  thinks  the  other  way  more  advis- 
able for  the  ordinary  use.  In  one  of  the  chapters  ™ 
which  I  mentioned,  where  he  is  vindicating  the 
words  of  Mr.  Dan.  Rogers  from  the  force  which 
Mr.  Danvers  had  put  on  them ;  and  where  he  con- 
fesses of  Mr.  Rogers  thus  much  ;  *  Mr.  Rogers  was 
'  for  retrieving  the  use  of  dipping,  as  witnessed  to 
'  by   antiquity,  approved  by  Scripture,  required  by 

*  the  church,  (as   then  it  was,  with  not  so  much  ap- 

*  pearance  of  liberty  in  the  case  granted  to  the  min- 
'  ister  as  now  is,)  and  symbolical  with  the  things 
'  signified  in  baptism :' — he  adds  his  own  opinion  in 
these  words  ;  '  Which  I  could  wish  as  well  as,  and  as 

*  heartily  as  he,  in  order  to  the  making  of  peace  in 
'  the  church,  if  that  would  do  it.'  And  in  the  next 
paragraph  ;  '  If  I  may  speak  my  thoughts,  I  believe 

*  the  ministers  of  the  nation  would  be  heartily  glad 
'  if  the  people  would  desire,  or  be  but  willing  to 
'  have  their  infants  dipped,  after  the  ancient  manner 
'  both  in  this  and  in  other  churches ;  and  bring 
'  them  to  baptism  in  such  a  condition  as  that  they 
'  might   be    totally  dipped,    without    fear   of  being 

m  Chap.  xi.  §.  52,  53. 


restoring  of  Dipping.  411 

*  destroyed.'   And  in  the  conclusion  of  that  book  "he  chap. 
thus  bespeaks  the  antipsedobaptists ;  '  And  as  some  — — — 

*  learned  persons,  who  have  defended  the  lawfulness  ^ije'aiUf-^"^ 
'  of  sprinkling,  have  yet  in  some  respects  preferred  '^'•<^*- 

*  dipping  before  it :  so,  though  I  blame  your  hold- 
'  ing  an  indispensable  necessity  of  it,  &c.  Yet  in 
'  order  to  the  peace  of  the  church  by  your  reunion 

*  with  it,  and  the  saving  of  your  souls  by  rescuing 

*  you  from  under  the  guilt  of  schism,  I  could  M'ish 
'  the  practice  of  it  retrieved  into  use  again  ;  so  far 
'  as  possibly  might  be  consistent  with  decency  of 
'  baptizing,  and  safety  to  the  baptized.'  He  speaks 
often  to  the  same  purpose  in  his  Modest  Plea. 

Dr.  Towerson,  in  his  Explication  of  the  Cate- 
chism ^,  having  recited  the  arguments  for  immer- 
sion, says,  '  How  to  take  off  the  force  of  these  argu- 

*  ments  altogether,  is  a  thing  I  mean  not  to  consider ; 
'  partly  because  our  church  seems  to  persuade  such 
'  an  immersion,  and  partly  because  I  cannot  but 
'  think  the  foremen tioned  arguments  to  be  so  far  of 

*  force,    as    to   evince    the   necessity  thereof,  where 

*  there  is  not  some  greater  necessity  to  occasion  an 
'  alteration  of  it.' 

Dr.  Whitby  says  p,  '  It  were  to  be  wished  that 
'  this  custom  [of  immersion]  might  be  again  of 
'  general  use ;  and  aspersion  only  })ermitted,  as  of 
'  old,  in  case  of  the  clinici,  or  in  present  danger  of 
'  death.' 

n  Chap.  xvii.  p.  293 . 

o  Of  Baptism,  p.  20,  21,  22.  [See  a  work  entitled,  '  Of  the 
'  Sacrament  of  Baptism,  in  pursuance  of  an  explication  of  the 
'  Catechism  of  the  church  of  England,'  by  Gabriel  Towerson, 
D.  D.  8vo.  London,  1687,  part  iii.  page  58.] 

P  Comment,  on  Romans  vi.  4. 


412  Learned  Men  plead  for  the 

CHAP.       These    (and    possibly   many   more)    have    openly 


declared  their  thoughts  concerning  the  present  eus- 
^16^3^^-^'  tom.  And  abundance  of  others  have  so  largely  and 
sties.  industriously  proved  that  a  total  immersion  was,  as 

Dr.  Cave  says  %  '  the  almost  constant  and  universal 
'  custom  of  the  primitive  times,'  that  they  have  suffi- 
ciently intimated  their  inclinations  to  be  for  it  now. 
So  that  no  man  in  this  nation,  who  is  dissatisfied 
with  the  other  way,  or  does  wish,  or  is  but  willing, 
that  his  child  should  be  baptized  by  dipping,  need 
in  the  least  to  doubt,  but  that  any  minister  in  this 
church  would,  according  to  the  present  direction 
of  the  rubric,  readily  comply  with  his  desire,  and,  as 
Mr.  Walker  says,  be  glad  of  it. 

And  as  for  the  danger  of  the  infants  catching  cold 
by  dipping,  sir  John  Floyer  has  in  a  late  book  ^  en- 
deavoured to  shew,  by  reasons  taken  from  the  nature 
of  our  bodies,  from  the  rules  of  medicine,  from  mo- 
dern experiences,  and  from  ancient  history,  that 
washing  or  dipping  infants  in  cold  water  is,  gene- 
rally speaking,  not  only  safe,  but  very  useful :  and 
that  though  no  such  religious  rite  as  baptism  had 
been  instituted,  yet  reason  and  experience  would 
have  directed  people  to  use  cold  bathing  both  of 
themselves  and  their  children  :  and  that  it  has  in  all 
former  ages  so  directed  them.  For  (besides  that  the 
Jews  by  God's  law  used  it  on  many  occasions,  and 
the  Christians  made  it  the  far  most  usual  way  of 
their  baptism)  he  shews  that  all  civilised  nations, 
the  iEgyptians,  Greeks,  Romans,  &c.,  made  frequent 

t)  Primitive  Christianity,  part  i.  chap.  lo.  [8vo.  1675.] 

'  Of  cold  baths.   [See  -^-TXPOAOTSIA,  or  the  History  of  Cold 

Bathing,  both  ancient  and  modern  :  by  Sir  John  Floyer.'    Third 

edition,  8vo.  London,  1709.] 


restoring  of  Dipping.  413 

use  of  it,  and  gave  great  commendations  of  it:  and   chap. 
that  nature  itself  has  taught  this  custom  to  many 


barbarous  nations  ;    the  old  Germans,   Highlanders,  }''''^''  '''^^^'■' 

'  o  '  the  apo- 

Irish,  Japanese,  Tartars,  and  even  the  Samoieds  who  sties. 
live  in  the  coldest  climate  that  is  inhabited. 

This  learned  physician  gives  a  catalogue  of  diseases 
for  which  it  is  good  :  some  of  them,  for  which  it  is 
the  best  remedy  that  is  known.  And  he  says,  he 
cannot  advise  his  countrymen  to  any  better  method 
for  preservation  of  health  than  the  cold  regimen  : 
to  dip  all  their  children  in  baptism  ;  to  wash  them 
often  afterward  till  three  quarters  of  a  year  old :  to 
inure  them  to  cold  air,  drinking  of  water,  few 
clothes :  to  use  them,  when  boys,  to  bathing  in 
rivers ;  when  men  to  cool  baths,  &c. 

He  prognosticates  that  the  old  modes  in  physic 
and  religion  will  in  time  prevail,  when  people  have 
had  more  experience  in  cold  baths  :  and  that  the 
approbation  of  physicians  would  bring  in  the  old  use 
of  immersion  in  baptism.  If  it  do  so,  one  half  of 
the  dispute  (which  has  caused  a  schism)  between 
the  psedobaptists  and  antipaedobaptists  will  be  over. 
There  are  more  of  the  first,  who  are  brought,  by  the 
arguments  of  the  other,  to  doubt  of  the  validity  of 
their  baptism,  for  that  they  were  not  dipped  at  the 
receiving  it,  than  there  are  for  that  they  received  it 
in  infancy.  Neither  was  there  ever  an  antipa^do- 
baptist  in  England,  as  I  shewed  in  the  last  chapter, 
till  this  custom  of  sprinkling  children,  instead  of 
dipping  them,  in  the  ordinary  baptisms,  had  for 
some  time  prevailed. 

What  has  been  said  of  this  custom  of  pouring  or 
sprinkling  water  in  the  ordinary  use  of  baptism,  is 
to  be  understood  only  in  reference  to  these  western 


41 4  What  Churches  do  still  dip  Infants. 

CHAP,  parts  of  Europe;  for  it  is  used  ordinarily  nowhere 


else.  The  Greek  church,  in  all  the  branches  of  it, 
the  apo-  does  Still  usc  immersiou  ;  and  they  hardly  count  a 
sties.  child,  except  in  case  of  sickness,  well  baptized  with- 
out it.  And  so  do  all  other  Christians  in  the  world, 
except  the  Latins.  That  which  I  hinted  before,  is  a 
rule  that  does  not  fail  in  any  particular  that  I  know 
of,  viz.  all  those  nations  of  Christians  that  do  now, 
or  formerly  did,  submit  to  the  authority  of  the  bi- 
shop of  Rome,  do  ordinarily  baptize  their  infants  by 
pouring  or  sprinkling.  And  though  the  English  re- 
ceived not  this  custom  till  after  the  decay  of  popery; 
yet  they  have  since  received  it  from  such  neighbour 
nations  as  had  begun  it  in  the  times  of  the  pope's 
power.  But  all  other  Christians  in  the  world,  who 
never  owned  the  pope's  usurped  power,  do,  and  ever 
did,  dip  their  infants  in  the  ordinary  use. 

And  if  we  take  the  division  of  the  world  from  the 
three  main  parts  of  it;  all  the  Christians  in  Asia, 
all  in  Africa,  and  about  one  third  part  of  Europe, 
are  of  the  last  sort :  in  which  third  part  of  Europe, 
are  comprehended  the  Christians  of  Grsecia,  Thracia, 
Servia,  Bulgaria,  Rascia,  Walachia,  Moldavia,  Russia 
Nigra,  &;c. ;  and  even  the  Muscovites,  who,  if  coldness 
of  the  country  will  excuse,  might  plead  for  a  dispen- 
sation with  the  most  reason  of  any.  Dr.  CruU  gives 
this  account  of  them"";  'the  priest  takes  the  child 
'  stark  naked  into  his  arms,  and  dips  him  three 
'  times  into  the  water,  &c. — The  water — is  never 
'  warmed  over  the  fire,  though  the  cold  be  never  so 
'  excessive :  but  they  put  it  sometimes  in  some  warm 
'  place  or  other,  to  take  off  a  little  of  the  cold.'     If 

t  State  of  Muscovy,  vol.  i.  chap,  i  i.p.  193,  194. 


IVhat  Churches  do  still  dip  Infants.  415 

tliey  warmed  it  more,  I  do  not  see  where  were  the  chap. 

IX 

hurt.     The  Latins,  that  staved  behind  at  the  coun-  _^_1_ 


cil  of  Florence,  do  determine*  it  to  be  indifferent,  ^^j^^'^^^J^^" 
'  whether  baptism  be   administered   in  warm  or  in  sties. 
'cold  water.'     And  an  archbishop  of  SamosS  who  ^  ^^' 
has  wrote  the  history  of  that  island,  says,  at  p.  45, 
that  they  use  hot  [or  warm]  water. 

We  have  no  reason  to  think  that  the  Muscovites 
do  submit  to  this,  as  to  a  hardship  put  upon  them 
by  the  Christian  religion ;  for  they  commonly,  when 
they  come  sweating  out  of  a  hot  stove,  do  suddenly 
throw  themselves  into  cold  water,  and  think  it  me- 
dicinal so  to  do,  as  the  said  doctor  relates.  And  the 
neighbour  nations  thereabouts,  even  those  that  are 
not  Christians,  do  ordinarily  put  their  infant  chil- 
dren into  the  coldest  water  they  can  get,  for  health's 
sake,  and  to  harden  them.  For  so  the  same  author 
tells  of  the  Crini  Tartars",  that  '  the  mothers  do  use 

*  to  bathe  their  infants,  once  a  day  at  least,  in  cold 
'  water,  wherein  a  little  salt  is  dissolved,  to  make 
'  them  hardy.'  And  the  success  answers ;  for  these 
are  one  of  the  healthiest,  hardiest,  and  most  vigorous 
nations  in  the  world. 

But   whereas    the   said    doctor   says^,    that    '  the 

*  Muscovites  glory  that  they  are  the  only  true  Chris- 
'  tians   now  in   the  world ;    forasmuch   as    they  are 

s  Cap.  de  Unione  Jacobinorum  et  Armenorum.  [See  the  de- 
cree of  pope  Eagenius  the  fourth,  addressed  to  the  Armenians, 
at  page  X056  of  vol.  3  1  of  the  councils  edited  by  Mansi.] 

t  [See  '  A  Description  of  the  present  State  of  Samos,  Nicaria, 
'  Patmos,  and  Mount  Athos.  By  Joseph  Georgirenes,  archbi- 
'  shop  of  Samos,  now  Hving  in  London,  translated,'  &c.  8  ', 
London,  1678.  The  book  contains  a  Gi'eek  dedication  by  the 
archbishop,  to  James  duke  of  York.] 

^  Chap.  vii.  p.  1 1  2.  x  Chap,  xi,  at  the  beginning,  p.  1 88. 


416  What  Churches  do  still  dip  Infants. 

CHAP.  '  baptized,  whereas  others  have  been  only  sprinkled  ; 
__ll__  '  which  is  the  reason  they  allege  for  rebaptizing  all 
Year  after  <  g^ch,  of  what  persuasion  soever,  that  embrace  their 

the  apo-  '  '■ 

sties.  <  religion  :' — This  is  neither  consistent  with  the  ac- 

count  given  by  himself  in  the  same  chapter^  of  their 
rebaptizations  ;  that  '  even  Muscovites,  who  having 
'  changed  their  religion  in  another  country,  are 
'  willing  to  return  to  their  own  communion,  must 
'  first  be  rebaptized  :'  nor  with  the  account  of  the 
practice  of  other  Greek  Christians,  who  do  all  bap- 
tize ordinarily  by  immersion  as  well  as  the  Musco- 
vites :  nor  with  the  account  given  by  other  writers 
of  the  practice  of  the  Muscovites  themselves.  For 
though  Mr.  Daille^  do  say  much  the  same  of  them 
as  Dr.  Crull  does  here,  (he  does  not  say  quite  the 
same :  he  says,  *  the  Muscovites  say,  that  the  Latins 

*  are  not  duly  and  rightly  baptized.)'  Yet  other 
writers  say,  that  the  Muscovites  themselves  do  in 
case  of  the  weakness  of  the  child  baptize  by  affusion. 
Joannes  Fabri%  in  an  epistle  that  he  has  written 
purposely  of  these  people's  religion,  says,  *  if  the 
'  child  be  strong,  he  is  thrice  plunged  all  over. 
'  Otherwise  he  is  wetted  with  the  water.  But  this 
'  last  is  seldom  used :'  *  conspersio  enim  minus  sufii- 

•  ciens  judicatur,'  '  for  they  count  sprinkling  not  so 
'  well  [or  not  so  sufficient].'     And  another  author 

y  [Page  194.] 

2  Lib.  2.  de  usu  Patrum,  p.  148,  [or  p.  329,  of  the  edition  40. 
GenevBe,  1656.] 

a  [See  a  work  by  Johannes  Fabri,  an  archbishop  of  Vienna, 
entitled  '  Moscovitarum  Rehgio,'  printed  at  Hasle  in  15  26^  at 
Spire  in  1582,  and  to  be  found  in  the  collection  of  '  Rerum 
'  Muscoviticarum  Auctores  Varii,'  folio,  Francofurti,  1 600.  See 
p.  136,  of  this  last  edition.] 


Tlte  Ancient  Christians  baptized  naked.  417 

quoted  by   Mr.  Walker  out  of  Purchas'   Pilgrims,  chap. 
part  iii.  page  229  ^,  says,  that  in  such  a  case  a  pot 


of  warm  water  is  poured  on  the  child's  head.     And  tlrapo^.^" 
another,  '  the  priest  pours  a  whole  gallon  of  water '*^'^''- 
'  upon  the  child,'  &c. 

Since  the  writing  of  this,  I  find  that  Mr.  Russen^ 
ch.  5,  (quoting  for  it  Alvarez,  ch.  5,)  says,  '  the 
'  Abassens  baptize  in  the  church-porch,  without 
'  fonts,  with  a  pot  full  of  water  only.'  I  know  not 
what  credit  is  to  be  given  to  this.  I  know  that 
Brerewoodd  does  often  note  Alvarez,  as  an  unfaith- 
ful relator.  And  Brerewood  himself,  though  he  say 
nothing  of  the  manner  of  their  baptizing  infants, 
(only  that  they  do  it  on  the  fortieth  day  for  a  male, 
and  the  eightieth  for  a  female  child,)  yet  speaking 
of  their  yearly  baptizing  themselves  on  twelfth-day, 
(not  using  it  as  a  sacrament,  but  as  a  customary 
memorial  of  Christ's  baptism  on  that  day,)  says,  that 
they  do  it  in  lakes  or  ponds,  ch.  23,  which  makes 
that  which  Alvarez  says  very  improbable. 

III.  What  was  just  now  mentioned  of  the  Mus- 
covites baptizing  stark  nakedf  and  dipping  three 
times,  is  perfectly  agreeable  to  the  ancient  practice 
in  both  the  usages.  The  ancient  Christians,  when 
they  were  ba}3tized  by  immersion,  were  all  baptized 
naked  ;  whether  they  were  men,  women,  or  children. 
Vossius^  has  collected  several  proofs  of  this :  which 
I  shall  omit,  because  it  is  a  clear  case.     The  English 

^  [Folio,  London,  1625.] 

c  [This  passage  of  Mr.  Russen  is  quoted  in  Stennet's  answer 
to  him,  p.  I  29.] 

•1  ['  Enquiries  concerning  Languages  and  Religion,'  &c.  4*'. 
16 1 4.] 

e  De  Baptismo,  Disput.  i.  cap.  6,  7,  8. 

WALL,   VOL.  II.  E  e 


418  The  Ancient  Chrhtians  haptized  naked. 

CHAP,   antipsedobaptists   need  not  have  made  so   great  an 
^^'      outcry  against  Mr.  Baxter,  for  his  saying  that  they 


the^a  f *^'  baptized  naked:  for  if  they  had,  it  had  been  no 
sties.  more  than  the  primitiA^e  Christians  did.  They 
thought  it  better  represented  the  putting  off  the 
old  man,  and  also  the  nakedness  of  Christ  on  the 
cross  :  moreover,  as  baptism  is  a  washing,  they 
judged  it  should  be  the  washing  of  the  body,  not 
of  the  clothes. 

They  took  great  care  for  preserving  the  modesty 
of  any  woman  that  was  to  be  baj)tized.  There  was 
none  but  women  came  near  or  in  sight  till  she  was 
undressed,  and  her  body  in  the  water :  then  the 
priest  came,  and  putting  her  head  also  under  water, 
used  the  form  of  baptism.  Then  he  departed,  and 
the  women  took  her  out  of  the  water,  and  clothed 
her  again  in  white  garments. 

There  is  an  account  given  by  Sozomen^  of  an 
insult  made  by  the  soldiers  in  the  great  church 
at  Constantinople,  against  St.  Chrysostom  and  his 
3°3- adherents :  and  how  in  Easter-eve  they  rushed  in 
armed :  and  he  adds,  '  there  was  a  great  tumult  at 
'  the  font,  the  women  shrieking  in  a  fright,  and  the 
'  children  crying  :  the  priests  and  deacons  were 
'  beaten,  and  forced  to  run  away  with  their  vest- 
'  ments  on.  What  else  must  needs  happen  in  such 
'  a  confusion,  they  that  have  been  baptized  do 
'  apprehend  ;  but  I  shall  not  express  it,  lest  some 
'  that  are  not  Christians  do  light  upon  my  book.' 

But  St.  Chrysostom  himself,  in  a  letter  of  com- 
plaint of  this  matter  to  Innocent  then  bishoj)  of 
Rome,  describes  the  foulness  of  the  outrage  more 
particularly:  'The  women  who  had  undressed  them- 

*  Hist.  Eccles.  lib.  viii   cap.  21. 


They  dipped  the  Head  three  times.  419 

*  selves  in  order  to  be  baptized,  were  forced  by  the  chap. 
'  fright   of  this   violence  to   run   away   naked  ;   not      ^^' 

'  being  permitted  in  that  amazement  to  provide  for  Y^=''' '*^'®^' 

^        ■  the  apo- 

*  the  modesty  and  credit  of  their  sex.    And  many  of  ^ti^s. 
'  them  were  also  wounded :   the   font  was    stained 

'  with  blood,  and  the   holy  waters  of  it  dyed  with 
'  a  red  colour.' 

IV.  The  way  of  trine  immersion,  or  plunging  the 
head  of  the  person  three  times  into  the  water,  was 
the  general  practice  of  all  antiquity.  Tertullian,  in 
a  dispute  against  Praxeas,  who  held  but  one  person 
in  the  Trinity,  uses  this  among  other  arguments^; 
our  Saviour  commanded  the  apostles,  that  they  should 
baptize  unto  the  Father,  and  unto  the  Son,  and  unto 
the  Holy  Spirit ;  '  not  unto  one  person,  for  we  are 
'  not  plunged  once,  but  three  times  ;  once  at  the 
'  naming  of  each  name.'  And  the  fiftieth  [alias  42] 
of  those  canons  that  are  very  ancient,  though  without 
reason  called  apostolic,  orders  any  bishop  or  presbyter 
that  does  not  use  the  trine  immersion  in  baptism  to 
be  deposed. 

The  ancients  do  themselves  own  that  there  is  no 
command  in  Scripture  for  this  :  yet  they  speak  of 
it  as  brought  into  use  by  the  apostles.  And  it  is 
common  with  them  to  urge  this  custom  and  some 
others,  as  instances  that  some  rites  or  orders  are 
derived  from  the  apostles'  practice,  and  yet  not 
set  down  in  Scripture.  Tertullian  ^,  arguing  ao-ainst 
some  that  pleaded,  that  '  in  all  pretence  of  tradition, 
'  one  must  produce  some  written  authority,'  gives 
an  answer,  which  I  shall  here  recite  at  large,  because 
he  instances  in  this  and  several  other  customs  then 
received. 

E  Cap.  26.  h  De  Corona  Militis,  ch.  i,  2,  3. 

E  e  2 


420  They  dipped  the  Head  three  times. 

CHAP.       *  Let  us   try  then,   whether    no   tradition   ought 

^^'      <  to  be  allowed  that  is  not  written  :    and   I   shall 

Year  ".<'ter  «  freely  ffrant  that  this  need   not  to  be  allowed,  if 

the  apo-  •'     ° 

sties.         '  the  contrary  be  not  evniced  by  the   examples  ot 
^°°' '  several  other  customs,  which  without  the  authority 

*  of  any  Scripture  are  approved,  only  on  the  account 
'  that  they  were  first  delivered,  and  have  ever  since 

*  been  used. 

'  Now  to  begin  with  baptism.  When  we  come 
'  to  the  water,  we  do  there  (and  we  do  the  same 
'  also,  a  little  before,  in  the  congregation)  under  the 

*  hand  of  the  pastor  make  a  profession  that  we  do 
'  renounce  the  Devil,  and  his  pomp,  and  his  angels. 
'  Then  we  are  three  times  plunged  into  the  water : 
'  and  we  answer  some  few  words  more  than  those 
'  which    our    Saviour  in    the    gospel   has    enjoined. 

*  When  we  are  taken  up  out  of  the  water,  we  taste 
'  a  mixture  of  milk  and  honey.  And  from  that  day 
'  we  abstain  a  whole  week  from  bathing  ourselves, 

*  which  otherwise  we  use  every  day. 

'  The  sacrament  of  the  Eucharist,  which  our  Lord 
'  celebrated  at  meal-time,  and  ordered  all  to  take  ; 
'  we  receive  in  our  assemblies  before  day :  and  never 

*  but  from  the  hands  of  the  pastor. 

'  We  give  oblations  every  year  for   [or  in   com- 

*  memoration   of]    the   dead   on   the  day   of  their 

*  martyrdom.  We  count  it  an  unfitting  thing  to 
'  keep  any  fasts  on  the  Lord's  day,  or  to  kneel  at 

*  our  prayers  on  that  day.     The  same  liberty  we 

*  take  all  the  time  from  Easter  to  Pentecost. 

*  We  are  troubled  at  it,  if  any  of  our  bread  or 
'  wine  fall  to  the  ground.  At  every  setting  out, 
'  or  entry  on  business ;  whenever  we  come  in  or  go 

*  out  from  any  place ;  when  we  dress  for  a  journey ; 


Tliey  dipped  the  Head  three  times.  421 

'  when  we  go  into  a  bath;  when  we  go  to  meat;  chap. 
'  when  the  candles  are  brought   in ;    when   we   lie 


*  down,    or   sit   down;    and   whatever  business    we^h^apo-^'^ 
'  have;  we  make  on   our  foreheads  the  sign  of  the^*^'^^- 

'  cross. 

'  If  you  search  in  the  Scriptures  for  any  command 

*  for  these  and  such  like  usages,  you  shall  find  none. 
'  Tradition  will   be   urged    to    you  as  the  ground  of 

*  them  ;  custom  as  the  confirmer  of  them ;  and  our 
'  religion  teaches  to  observe  them.' 

Of  the  oblations  and  prayers  which  they  made 
for  [or  in  commemoration  of]  the  dead  ;  as  I  said 
before  in  the  first  part,  chap.  xx.  §.  3.  that  they  were 
nothing  of  the  nature  of  the  popish  ones ;  so  here  it 
appears:  for  they  used  them  for  martyrs  themselves. 
And  though  we  see  here,  that  the  papists  were  not 
the  first  that  used  the  sign  of  the  cross ;  yet  they 
are  the  first  that  ever  taught  that  it  is  to  be 
w^orshipped. 

In  an  epistle  of  St.  Hierome  in  form  of  a  dia-278. 
logue  ',  one  of  the  parties  makes  the  same  use  of  the 
same  instance  of  trine  immersion,  as  Tertullian  does 
here :  saying  thus  of  the  custom  of  confirmation 
after  baptism,  which  he  there  proves  by  Scripture, 
but  adds  ;  '  And  if  there  w^ere  no  authority  of  Scrip- 

*  ture  for  it ;  the  consent  of  the  whole  world  in 
'  that  matter  would  obtain  the  force  of  a  precept. 
'  For  many  other  things  which  are  by  tradition  ob- 

*  served  in  the  church,  have  got  authority  as  if  they 

*  were  written  laws :  as,  in  the  font  of  baptism,  ter 
'  caput  mergitare,  to   plunge   the  head  thrice  under 

'  water,'  &c.     St.  Basil   speaks  just  after  the  same  260. 

^  Dialogus     aclversus   Luciferianos.       [Sect.    8.     Op.   torn.    ii. 

p.   180.  edit.  \'allarsii.] 


422  The  Trine  Immersion 

CHAP,  manner  of  the  same  thing  '^.     And  St.  Chrysostom  ^ 

L_  says,  '  Our  Lord  has  delivered  to  us  one  baptism  by 

tT.rapl'^'  *  three  immersions.' 

sties.  The  Eunomians  had  the  oddest  way  of  baptizing 

that  ever  was  heard  of.  For  besides  that  they  dif- 
fered from  all  other  Christians  in  the  words  used  at 
baptism,  one  sect  of  them  baptizing  only  in  the 
name  of  Christ,  as  I  said  '"  ;  another  sect,  instead  of 
saying,  '  In  the  name  of  the  Father,  and  of  the  Son, 
'  and  of  the  Holy  Spirit,'  expressed  their  own  im- 
pious opinions  in  these  words  " ;  '  In  the  name  of 
'  the  uncreated  God,  and  in  the  name  of  his  created 
*  Son,  and  in  the  name  of  the  sanctifying  Spirit, 
'  created  by  the  Son,  who  is  himself  created.'  Be- 
sides this,  their  manner  of  baptizing  was  to  plunge 
the  person  but  once  into  the  water :  and  that  not 
all  his  body  neither.  For  they  said,  all  the  parts  of 
the  body  below  the  waist  are  abominable,  and  must 
not  touch  the  water  :  so  they  used  to  uncover  the 
person  to  the  waist ;  and  then  holding  his  heels  up- 
ward, and  his  head  downward,  they  dipped  him 
into  the  font  as  far  as  the  waist.  They  continued 
this  custom  till  a  ridiculous  accident  happened  ° : 
a  heavy  and  unwieldy  man  coming  to  be  baptized, 
they  that  were  to  hold  him  with  his  head  down- 
ward let  him  fall,  and  he  broke  his  head  against 
the   bottom   of  the  font.     To  prevent  which  mis- 

^  Lib.  de  Spiritu  Sancto,  ch.  27.  [Sect.  66.  Op.  torn.  iii.  p.  54. 
edit.  Benedict.  1721.J 

^  Homil.  de  Fide.  [torn.  vii.  p.  290.  edit.  Savill.  torn.  ix. 
p.  854.  ed.  Montfaucon.] 

m  Chap.  viii.  §.  6. 

"  Epiphanius,  Hseres.  76. 

o  Theodoret.  Hseret.  Fab.  lib.  iv.  cap.  de  Eunomio. 


not  absolutely  necessary.  423 

chance   for  the  future,  they  invented   another  way.  chap. 
It  was  much  the  same   as  was   one   of  the  devices — 


with  which  the  Dutch  are  said  to  have  tortured  the jhrapo-*^"^ 
Eng-lish  at  Amboyna :  only  the  muffler  was  larger.  *'^'^^- 
They  tied  one  end  of  it  about  his  waist,  and  turning 
the  other  open  end  upwards,  they  poured  in  water 
till  it  covered  the  head  of  the  person.  So  it  pleases 
God  to  suffer  heretics  to  be  infatuated,  that  must 
have  newfangled  ways. 

The  Catholics,  though  they  judged  the  trine  im- 
mersion to  have  been  in  use  from  the  begiiming,  yet 
since  it  is  not  found  to  be  enjoined  by  Christ  nor 
his  apostles,  did  not  count  it  absolutely  necessary  to 
baptism.  For  about  the  year  590,  some  Spanish  49°- 
bishops  sent  to  Gregory,  bishop  of  Rome,  for  his 
advice.  They  told  him  their  custom  was  to  put  the 
head  of  the  baptized  but  once  under  the  water  :  but 
that  some  Arians  in  that  country  kept  up  the  cus- 
tom of  three  immersions  :  and  that  they  made  a 
wicked  advantage  of  it,  by  persuading  the  people 
that  thereby  was  signified  that  there  are  three  sub- 
stances in  the  Trinity,  into  which  they  were  sepa- 
rately baptized.  Gregory  makes  them  answer  P; 
that  though  the  custom  of  the  church  of  Rome  and 
other  churches  was  three  immersions,  yet  he  in  that 
case  would  advise  them  to  keep  to  their  present 
custom  :  that  *  in  the  same  faith  different  usages  of 
'  the  church  do  no  hurt :  that  whereas  there  is  in 
'  the  three  persons  but  one  substance,  there  could  be 
'  no  blame  in  dipping  the  infant  either  once  or 
'  thrice.      For  that   by  three    immersions   the  three 

P  Epist.  ad  Leandrum  Epitrcojjuai  Hit^palenscui,  lib.  i.  cli.  45. 
[See  Gregorii  Opera;  also  the  Council?,  torn.  ix.  p.  1059.  cdif. 
Mansi.] 


424  The  Forehead  signed  loith  the  Cross. 

CHAP.  «  persons,  or  by  one,  the  singularity  of  the  substance 
'  was  represented.     That   if  they  should  now  on  a 


thrapo^-^'  *  sudden  take  up    the    other    custom,   the   heretics 

sties.         i  would  boast   that  they  were   come   over  to    their 

'  side,'  &c.     So  the  Spaniards  kept  to  the  use  of  one 

530  immersion  for  some  time.     For  forty  years  after,  it 

is  confirmed  in  one  of  their  councils  ^.     But  Wala- 

fridus  Strabo  says  ^  that  after  a  while  *  the  old  way 

*  prevailed.' 

The  schoolmen  among  the  papists,  though  they 
say  that  either  way  may  do,  yet  speak  of  trine  im- 
mersion, where  immersion  is  used,  as  much  the 
more  fitting.  And  for  the  protestants,  Vossius  says^ 
'  What  son  of  the  church  will  not  willingly  hold  to 
'  that  custom  which  the  ancient  church  practised  all 
'  over  the  world,  except  Spain  ?  &c.  Besides,  at  pre- 
'  sent  the  trine  immersion   is  used  in  all  countries : 

*  so  that  the  custom  cannot  be  changed  Mithout  an 

•  affectation  of  novelty,   and   scandal  given   to    the 

•  weak.'     He  means  all  countries  where  immersion 
is  used. 

V.  Of  the  circumstances  that  anciently  attended 
baptism,  some  are  mentioned  by  Tertullian  in  the 
place  last  recited.  One  is  the  signing  of  the  fore- 
head with  the  sign  of  the  cross.  This  is  spoken  of 
by   all   the    ancient    writers  as  used   by    Christians 

q  Concil.  Tolet.  4.  Can.  5.  [or  capit.  6.  in  Mansi's  Councils, 
torn.  X.  p.  618,  619.] 

"  De  incrementis  Eccles.  ch.  26,  [Printed  at  Venice,  8vo, 
1572:  and  in  the  collection  published  by  Ferrarius  under  the 
title  '  De  Catholicse  Ecclesise  divinis  Officiis  ac  ministeriis  varii 
'  vetustorum  fere  omnium  Ecclesiae  patrum  ac  Scriptorum  libri,' 
foho,  RomBe,  1591.  p.  352.] 

*  De  Baptismo,  Disput.  2.  Thes.  4. 


The  Forehead  signed  with  the  Cross.  425 

upon  all  occasions.     They  that  nowadays  are  against  chap. 
the  use  of  it  at  baptism  do  observe,  that  though  the      ^^' 


fathers  do  often  mention  this  custom,  yet  none  ofY®'''"^*^^^'" 

'   *'  the  aj)o- 

them  do  speak  particularly  of  its  being  used  at  bap-s'ies. 
tism.  I  gave  an  instance,  I  think,  plain  enough  to  280. 
the  contrary,  in  the  first  part,  chap.  xiv.  ^.  5.  And 
besides,  when  they  say,  as  Tertullian  here  does,  that 
it  was  used  on  every  occasion  that  was  never  so 
little  solemn ;  they  I  think  sufficiently  intimate  its 
use  at  baptism,  which  is  the  most  solemn  act  of  a 
Christian's  whole  life.  Besides,  that  Tertullian 
speaking  of  baptism,  says,  Caro  signatur,  ut  anima 
muniatur. 

St.  Basil  mentions  this  custom  of  Christians  at  260. 
the  same  placed  M'here  he  mentions  that  of  trine 
immersion.  And  St.  Cyprian"  having  occasion  to  150- 
recite  that  text,  Ezek.  ix.  4,  5,  6.  where  the  execu- 
tioners of  God's  wrath  are  commanded  to  slai/  all, 
old  and  yoimcj,  maids  and  little  children,  that  had 
not  the  mark  wpon  their  foreheads,  applies  it  to  the 
Christians,  but  says,  it  signifies  that  none  now  can 
escape  but  those  only  that  are  renati  et  signo  Christi 
signati,  '  baptized  and  signed  with  Christ's  mark.' 
And  he  frequently  in  other  places  speaks  of  it  as  a 
thing  used  by  all  Christians.  And  Rufinus  says''^ 
'  it  was  the  custom  for  every  one  at  the  end  of  the 
'  creed,  fronteni  signacido  contingere,  to   make   the 

*  De  Spiritu  Sancto,  ch.  27.  [Op.  torn.  iii.  p.  54.] 
^  Ad  Demetrianum,    prope    finem.      [Cypviani    Opera,  p.  223. 
ed.  Benedictin.] 

X  Apol.  1.  statim  ab  initio.  [Namely,  the  first  book  of  Ru- 
finus' Invectives  against  S.  Jerome.  See  these  in  torn.  ii.  page 
583,  &c.  (especially  sect.  4.)  of  Jerome's  works  edited  by  V'al- 
larsius.] 


426  The  Epistle  of  Barnabas. 

CHAP.  '  sign   on  his  forehead  :'   and  we   know  that  every 

U one  repeated  the  Creed  at  his  baptism,  either  by 

^^^l^lT""  himself  or  his  sponsors,  as  Rufinus   himself  in  his 
sties,         '  Explication  of  the  Creed'  mentions,  and  calls  it  the 

*  ancient  custom.'  [Sect.  3.] 

It  was  a  noble  thing  that  they  designed  by  this 
badge  of  the  cross.  It  was  to  declare  that  they 
would  not  be  ashamed  of  the  cross  of  Christ :  never 
be  abashed  at  the  flouts  of  the  heathens,  who  ob- 
jected to  them  that  the  person  in  whom  they  trusted 
as  their  God  had  been  executed  for  a  malefactor  : 
never  be  scandalized  if  it  came  to  be  their  fortune  to 
suffer  it  themselves.  On  the  contrary,  they  volun- 
tarily owned  it  as  their  share  and  allotment  in  this 
world.  This  was  according  to  our  Saviour's  rule, 
'  to  deny   themselves,   to  take  up   their  cross,   and 

*  follow  him.'     He  that  does  this  with  a  firm  reso- 
lution is  the  man  that  has  overcome  this  world. 

VI.  Another  custom  that  Tertullian  instances  in, 
is,  the  giving  to  the  new  baptized  person  a  mixture 
of  '  milk  and  honey.'  There  is  none  of  the  ceremo- 
nial circumstances  that  accompanied  baptism,  of 
which  so  early  mention  is  made,  as  there  is  of  this, 
if  Barnabas'  epistle  be  so  ancient  as  learned  men  do 
think.  For  as  Tertullian  one  hundred  years  after 
the  apostles  here  speaks  of  it  as  a  thing  generally 
11  nd  constantly  used  ;  so  it  is  also  plainly  intimated 
in  that  epistle.  Which  because  the  interpreters  of 
it  have  not  minded,  nor  have  taken  any  notice  that 
the  place  does  at  all  refer  to  baptism;  I  shall  recite 
it  something  at  large  :  and  it  will  a])pear  that  this 
{'iistom  used  at  the  Christian  baptism  gives  some 
light  to  it,  which  otherwise  seems  to  have  none 
at  all. 


The  Epistle  of  Barnabas.  427 

He  had  been  shewing  that  many  sayings  of  the  chap. 
Old  Testament  do  in  an  allegorical  way  refer  to  the      ^^' 


church  of  Christians  that  was  to  be.     He  instances  Y*'^'' after 

the  apo- 

for  one  in  that  description  given  by  Moses  of  the  sties. 
promised   land,    where    he    calls    it    a  land  floiving 
with  milk  and  honey.     To  explain  how  this  belongs 
to  the  Christians,   he  says,  chap.  viJ',  'Exei  ovv  ava- 

KaiVLcra^  i'lfxa?  ep  Ttj  aCpecrei  tcov  ci/uiapTiociv,  eirou^a-ev  ^fia^ 
aWov  TviTov  o)?  Traiolov  e-^eiv  Trjv  y'f^'yj',  (o?  av  ko.\ 
avaTrXaarcroiuevoug    Q.   avaTrXacrarofxevo^j    avTO^   '//««?,  &C. 

*  Since  God  having  at  the  forgiveness  of  our  sins  [i.  e. 
'  at  baptism]  renewed  us,  has  caused  us  to  have  our 

*  hearts  in  another  form  as  the  heart  of  a  child, 
'  just  as  if  he  had  formed  us  anew,  &c.,  therefore 
'  the  prophet  thus  foretold  it ;  Enter  into  the  land 
^  floiving  tvith  milk  and  honey ^  and  rule  in  it.  'ISou 
"  ovv  ^jULeig  avaT^eirXa.a-iJ.eQa,  &c.     Behold  then  ivG  are 

*  formed  anew.  As  also  he  speaks  by  another  pro- 
'  phet,  Behold,  says  the  Lord,  I  will  take  from  them, 
'  that  is,  from  those  whom  the  Spirit  of  the  Lord 
'  foresaw,  their  hearts  of  stone,  and  I  will  put  into 

'  tlieni   hearts  of  flesh. Wherefore  we   are    they 

'  whom  he  has  brought  into  that  good  land.  Bat 
'  what  means  the  milk  and  honey  ?  Because  as  a 
'  child  is  nourished  first  with  milk,  and  then  with 
'  honey  ;  so  we,  being  kept  alive  with  the  belief  of 
'  his  promises,  and  the  word  of  his  gospel,  shall  live,' 
&c.  To  the  same  purpose  he  speaks  of  baptism  as 
a  new  formation,  chap.  xvi. 

The  coherence  which  he  seems  to  mean,  is  thus. 
The  Christian  baptism  does  put  us  into  a  new  state ; 
by  God's  forgiving  us  all  that  is  past,  and  giving  us 

y  [See  S.  Barnabae  Epist.  cipud  Putres  Apostol.  edit.  Cotelerii, 
fol.  1698,  p.  18.] 


428  Milk  and  Honey. 

CHAP,  new  hearts,   we  are  in  the  state  of  children  new 

TX 

'      born.     Milk  and  honey  (which  are  therefore  given 


Year  after  after  baptism)  being  food  proper  for  children,  and 

sties.  being  the  things  by  which  Moses   did  characterise 

the  promised  land ;  that  character  of  it  does  typify 

the  true  land  of  promise,  to  the  enjoyment  whereof 

the  Christians  are  now  by  baptism  called. 

The  custom  of  giving  milk  and  honey  to  the  new- 
baptized  person,  whether  he  were  a  grown  man  or 
280.  an  infant,  continued  down  to  St.  Hierome's  time  ;  for 
he  mentions  it^.  And  how  much  lonarer,  I  know 
not :  for  I  remember  no  later  mention  of  it.  It  has 
however  for  a  long  time  been  forborne.  It  is  natural 
to  suppose,  that  this,  being  only  an  emblem  to  sig- 
nify that  the  new-baptized  person  is  as  a  new-born 
babe,  was  left  off  at  such  time  when,  the  world 
being  come  into  the  church,  there  were  hardly 
any  more  baptisms  but  of  babes  in  a  proper  sense, 
who  needed  no  such  representation  to  signify  their 
infancy. 

It  was  in  those  first  times  of  general  use  among 
the  heretics,  as  well  as  catholics.  For  Tertullian 
100.  objecting  to  Marcion%  that  his  Christ,  how  much 
soever  he  undervalued  the  God  that  made  the  world, 
yet  was  forced  to  make  use  of  his  creatures  even  in 
his  religious  offices,  says,  '  he  does  not,  for  all  that, 
'  reject  the  water  of  the  Creator,  with  which  he 
'  washes  his  disciples  ;  nor  his  oil,  with  which  he 
'  anoints  them :  Nee  mellis  et  lactis  societatem^  qua 
6o- '  infantat :  nor  the  mixture  of  milk  and  honey,  with 
'  which  he  enters  them  as  infants :  nor  his  bread,  &c. 

'■'  Adversus  liuciferianos,  [Op.  torn.  ii.  edit.  Vallars.] 
"•  Contra  Marcion.  lib,  i.  cap.  14. 


TV/life  Garment.      Oil.     Chrism.  429 

'being  forced  in   liis   own  sacraments  to  make  use  chap. 
'  of  the  beggarly  gifts  of  the  Creator.'  ^^- 

VII.  The  white  garment,  in  which   the  new-bai)- ^  *"="■  ^f*^^" 
i-      1  11,.  "^'^^  '^po- 
tized  persons  were  clothed,  is  not  mentioned,  that  I  sties. 

know   of,  by    any    of  the   earliest    writers.     Cyril  ^  250. 

mentions  it;  and   in  the  after-times  there  is  much 

said  about  it.     By  it   they  signified   that  they  were 

now  '  washed  from   their  sins   in   the  blood  of  the 

'  Lamb,  had  put  on  Christ,  were  become  children  of 

*  the  light  and   of  the   day ;  and   resolved  to   keep 

*  themselves  unspotted  from  the  world.'  They 
wore  this  for  a  week  :  and  then  it  was  laid  up  as  an 
evidence  against  them,  if  they  ever  revolted  from 
that  holy  faith  and  profession.  This  was  used  in 
the  case  of  infants  as  well  as  of  grown  persons.  I 
gave  an  instance  before  ^. 

VIII.  There  were  in  some  churches  two  anoint- 
ings used  at  baptism.  One,  of  the  naked  body  with 
oil  just  before  the  immersion.  Of  this  St.  Cyril 
speaks,  CatecL  My  stag.  2,  and  the  author  of  250. 
QucEstiones  a  Gentihus  Propositae^,  Q.  137;  and 
St.  Chrysostom,  Horn.  6.  in  Epist.  ad  Coloss.  290. 

The  other,  which  was  universally  used,  and  is 
mentioned  by  the  more  ancient  writers,  was  after 
the  baptism,  with  a  rich  ointment  or  chrism.  I  ob- 
served before%  that  the  first  mention  we  have  of  this 

^  Cateches.  Mystagog.  4.  [apud  Cyrilli  Hierosolym.  Opera, 
p. 3 22.  edit.  Benedict,  fol.  Paris.  1720.] 

c  Part  i.  ch.  xviii.  §.  i. 

d  [See  Quaestiones  et  Responsiones  ad  Orthodoxos,  a  treatise 
formerly  attributed  to  Justin  Martyr,  and  printed  with  his 
works;  viz.  at  p.  501.  of  the  Benedictine  edition,  fol.  Paris, 
1742.] 

^  Chap.  V.  §.  I. 


430  White  Gat^ment.     Oil.     Chrism. 

CHAP.   cLrism   was   the  use  of  it  by  the    Valeiitinian  he- 


IX 


Year  after 


retics ;  who,  as  Ireiiajiis  tells  us  ^,  '  anointed  the 
the^a  o"^"^  '  baptized  person  with  balsam  ;  and  said,  This  oint- 
sties.  «  ment  is  a  type  of  that   sweetness  which  surpasses 

'  all  things.'  But  though  this  be  something  an- 
cienter  than  any  mention  of  it  as  used  among  the 
Catholics  ;  yet  it  is  plain  that  it  was  also  used  by 
them  generally  about  the  same  time :  because  au- 
thors a  little  after  this  do  speak  of  it  as  an  unques- 
loo.  tioned  custom.  Tertullian  recites  it  thus  ^  ;  '  Then 
'  when  we  come  out  of  the  water,  we  are  anointed 

*  with  a  blessed  [or  consecrated]  ointment,  accord- 
'  ing  to  that  ancient  rite  by  which  men  used  to  be 
'  anointed  for  the  priest's  office,  with  oil  out  of  a 
'  horn  ;  ever  since  the  time  that  Aaron  was  anointed 

*  by  Moses :  so  that  Christ  himself  has  his  name 
'  from  chrism  [or  unction]  :'  and  a  little  after  ; 
'  then  we  have  the  imposition  of  hands  on  us,  which 

*  calls  down  and  invites  the  Holy  Spirit.'     And  St. 
150. Cyprian  thus*^ ;  'The  baptized  person  must  be  anoint- 

*  ed  also ;  that   by  having  the   chrism,  that   is,  the 
267. '  anointing,  he  may  be  the  anointed  of  God.'     And 

in  the  council  of  Laodicea  the  forty-eighth  canon  is, 
'  Baptized  persons  must  after  their  baptism  receive 
'  the  holy  anointing,'  &c.  In  a  M'ord  ;  there  is  no- 
thing more  frequently  mentioned  in  antiquity  than 
this  anointing  and  laying  on  of  the  hands  of  the  bi- 
shop, in  order  to  implore  the  graces  of  the  Holy 
278.  Spirit  on  the  baptized.     And  yet  St.  Hierome,  when 


f  Lib.  iii,  cap.  2.  [This  reference  is  undoubtedly  wrong  :  the 
passage  quoted  occurs  in  book  i,  chap.  21,  [abas  18.]  sect.  3. — 
p.  96  of  the  Benedictine  edition.] 

S  De  Baptismo,  cap.  7.  ^  Epist.  70.  ad  Januarium. 


The  Imposition  of  Hands.  431 

lie  is  in  one  of  his  moods,  says  ';  '  We  find  this  done  chap. 

.IX 

'  in   many  places,  more  for  the  credit  of  the   epi- 


'  scopal  office,  than  for  any  necessity  of  the  precept.'  ^^^l^  ^^^^ 

The  parts  of  the  body,  that  were  anointed,  were  sties. 
not  in  all  clinrches  the  same.  In  the  church  of  Je- 
rusalem it  was  the  forehead,  (which  was  ever  in  all 
churches  one  of  the  places,)  and  the  ears,  the  nos- 
trils, and  the  breast :  as  appears  by  the  third  of 
St.  Cyril's  JNIystical  Catechisms  ^'.  250. 

The  chrism  was  used  presently  after  the  baptism :  . 
and  so  was  the  laying  on  of  hands,  if  the  person 
were  adult,  and  the  baptizer  were  a  bishoj).  Bat  if 
the  person  were  an  infant,  the  laying  on  .of  hands 
was  deferred  till  he  were  of  age,  with  his  own 
mouth  to  ratify  the  profession  made  at  baptism. 
And  though  the  person  were  adult ;  yet  if  it  was 
only  a  deacon  or  a  presbyter  that  baptized  him,  the 
laying  on  of  hands  was  ordinarily  reserved  for  the 
bishop  to  do  :  according  to  that  example  of  the 
church  at  Jerusalem,  who  having  heard  that  many 
people  at  Samaria  had  been  converted  and  baptized 
by  Philip,  who  was  but  a  deacon  \  scut  unto  tliein 
Peter  and  John.  Then  laid  they  their  hands  07i 
them :  atid  they  received  the  Holy  Ghost. 

The  council  of  Eliberis  do  order  "\  that  if  a  lay-  205. 
man  or  a  deacon  have  in  time  of  necessity  given 
baptism ;  the  person,  if  he  live,  must  be  brought  to 
the  bishop  for  imposition  of  hands.  But  they  seem 
to  suppose,  that  if  the  baptism  Avas  given  by  a  pres- 
byter ;  he,   in    such    case  of  necessity,   might  give 

J  Adversus   Luciferianos.    [sect.    8.    Op.   torn.  ii.  p    180.   edit. 
Vallars.] 

k  [See  the  preceding  page.]  '  Acts  viii.  14,  15,  &c. 

"'  Can    38,  and  77.  [Concil.  torn.  ii.  p.  12,  18.  edit.  Mansi.] 


4,'3^  The  hnpo^\tion  of  Hands. 

CHAP,  the  imposition  too,  rather  than  the  party  die  with- 

IX.  ,   ., 
out  it. 

Year  after       jj^  ^g^g  ^]jg  custom  of  the  church  of  RoHie,  that  if 

the  apo- 
stles, the  baptizer  were  under  the  degree  of  a  bishop,  he 

should  anoint  the  other  parts  aforementioned,  but 
not  the  forehead  :  and  the  anointing  of  that  was  re- 
served for  the  bishop  to  do,  when  he  laid  on  hands,  as 
312. 1  quoted  before"  out  of  pope  Innocent.  But  the  first 
council  of  Orange  allows  of  but  one  anointing  of 
the  baptized,  and  that  to  be  used  presently  after  the 
baptism.     '  But  if  any  one,'  say  they",  *  by  reason  of 

*  any  accident  was  not  anointed  at  his  baptism  ;  then 

*  the  bishop  shall  be  advised  of  it  when  he  comes  to 
'  confirm  him.  For  we  have  but  one  benediction  of 
'  chrism.  Not  pretending  to  set  a  rule  to  any,  but 
'  that  the  anointing  may  be  esteemed  necessary.' 

And  in  the  church  of  Rome,  though  the  ordinary 
rule  were,  that  none  but  the  bishop  should  give  the 
chrism  on  the  forehead,  as  I  said  ;  yet  in  case  of 
scarcity  of  bishops,  or  of  their  negligence  in  per- 
forming their  visitations  to  do  this,  it  was  allowed 
490.  to  presbyters  to  do  it.  For  Gregory  p  the  Great,  in 
the  ninth  epistle  of  his  third  book,  says,  that  '  pres- 

*  byters  may  anoint  the  breast,  but  none  but  the 
'  bishop  the  forehead.'  But  in  Epistle  26.  he  re- 
vokes this  order  in  the  case  of  want  of  bishops,  and 
in  such  a  case  allows  the  presbyters  to  anoint  the 
forehead  too.  And  long  before  his  time,  the  same 
liberty  had  been  given  to  presbyters,  '  in  the  absence 
'  of  the  bishop,  not  else,'    in  the  first   council  of 

"  Part  i.  chap.  xvii.  §.  6. 

"Can.  I.  [Concil.  torn.  vi.  p.  435.  edit.  Mansi.] 
P  [Vide  Gregorii  Opera:    vel  Concilia,  edit.  Mansi,  torn.  ix. 
p.  1 161.  1173.] 


The  Imposition  of  Hands.  433 

TolefloP.     And  the  author  of  the  comments  ascribed  chap. 
to  St.  Ambrose^,  in  Ephes.  c.  4,  says,  it  was  the  ens- 11_ 


torn  at  that  time  in  ^gypt;  *  Apud  ^gyptum  pres- J'^^^^plf^^" 

*  byteri    consignant,  si   praesens   non   sit   episcopus.' st^'^s. 
'  The  presbyters  do  confirm,  if  the  bisliop  be  not 

*  present.' 

Novatian,  it  seems,  as  he  was  not  baptized  in  the  120. 
ordinary  way,  but  in  his  bed ;  (which  was  one  ob- 
jection, against  his  being  made  a  bishop  ;)  so  also  he 
never  had  had  this  anointing  and  imposition  of 
hands ;  upon  which  Cornelius  founds  this  other  ^5°- 
objection  against  him*":  ^Neither  was  he,  after  he 
'  recovered,  made  partaker  of  those  other  things 
'  which  a  Christian  ought  by  the  rule  of  the  church 

*  to  have ;  i.  e.  to  be  confirmed  [or  sealed,  (Tcppajia-dn- 
'  vai]  by  the  bishop  :  which  he  not  having,  how  was 

*  he  made  partaker  of  the  Holy  S])irit  V 

If  any  one  had  been  baptized  in  a  schismatical 
congregation,  and  afterward  desired  to  be  admitted 
among  the  catholics  ;  he  was  by  the  rule  of  some 
churches  to  be  baptized  anew :  but  in  the  church  of 
Rome  (whose  example  finally  prevailed)  he  was  not 
baptized  anew,  {provided  those  from  whom  he  came 
believed  the  Trinity,  and  baptized  into  it,)  but  he 
had  a  new  imposition  of  hands  and  anointing.  Foi^ 
they  would  never  yield  that  the  prayers  of  schis- 
matics could  procure  the  grace  of  the  Holy  Spirit. 

Of  these  two  things,  the  chrism  or  anointing  is 
not  commanded  in  Scripture.     Yet  it  is  still  prac- 

P  Can.  20.  [Concil.  ed.  Mansi,  torn.  iii.  p.  1002.] 
q  [See  these  at  p.  82.  of  the  Appendix  to  vol.  ii.  of  the  Bene- 
dictine edition.] 

r  Euseb.  Hist.  Eccl.  lib.  vi.  c.  43.  [p.  m.  pag.  313.  edit. 
Reading.] 

WALL,  VOL.  II.  F  f 


484  The  Imposifiofi  of  Hands. 

CHAP,   tised  by  all  the  Christians  of  the   east   and  west, 

TX 

'  except  the  protestants.  But  the  laying  on  of  hands 
^h^'^a^^'"  is  plainly  mentioned  in  the  Scripture,  Acts  viii.  17; 
sties.  Heb.  vi.  2 ;  and  is  yet  continued  by  all  Christians, 
except  some  very  absurd  people.  It  is  enjoined  in 
the  church  of  England,  with  an  excellent  office 
drawn  up  on  purpose  for  it.  But  I  think  there  is 
never  a  divine  of  that  church,  that  has  not  expressed 
his  grief,  that  it  is  not  more  frequently  offered,  and 
more  seriously  and  solemnly  accepted  and  used.  I 
hope  so  much  of  what  St.  Hierome  says  in  the  place 
I  last  quoted  from  him  %  is  true  ;  *  That  it  is  not 
'  necessary  to  salvation :  for  else,'  as  he  there  says, 
'  they  are  in  a  lamentable  condition,  who  in  villages 
'  and  remote  places,  being  baptized  by  presbyters 
*  or  deacons,  do  die  before  the  bishop's  visitation.' 

These  were  the  most  ancient  rites  relating  to 
baptism.  Many  that  came  up  in  after-times,  and 
are  now  used  in  the  church  of  Rome,  are  not  worth 
the  reciting :  and  it  would  be  tedious  to  do  it. 

It  is  to  be  noted  here,  that  some  learned  men, 
who  are  skilled  in  the  customs  of  the  Jews,  do  as- 
sure us,  that  those  three  ceremonies,  of  anointing 
the  body  at  baptism,  and  of  the  trine  immersion, 
and  of  the  milk  and  honey,  were  all  used  by  the 
Jews  in  their  baptizing  of  a  proselyte,  whether 
infant  or  adult  (as  well  as  the  requiring  under- 
takers in  the  case  of  infants).  And  this  is  indeed 
the  most  probable  account  of  the  way  from  whence 
it  was  that  the  first  Christians  had  these  customs, 
of  which  there  is  no  mention  in  the  writings  of  the 
New  Testament,  viz.  that  they  used  them  by  imita- 
tion of  the  Jewish  baptism.     Which  does  still  more 

s  Adversus  Luciferianos.  [See  above,  p.  431.] 


The  Professions.  435 

confirm  (what  I  discoursed  of  in  the  introduction t)  chap. 

IX 

that  they  reckoned  their  baptism  to  succeed  (with  __1__ 
some  alterations)  in  the  room  of  the  Jewish  baptism  ^j^^^^  ^^*®'" 
of  proselytes  of  the  nations.  *ties. 

IX.  But  the  most  material  thing  by  far  that  was 
done  at  baptism,  was  the  professions ;  the  sincerity 
whereof  is  more  to  be  regarded  than  the  external 
baptism  itself:  as  St.  Peter  testifies,  1  Ep.  iii.  21. 
They  were  constantly  and  universally  required  :  in 
the  case  of  grown  persons,  to  be  made  with  their 
own  mouth  in  the  most  serious  manner  ;  and  in  the 
case  of  infants,  by  their  sponsors  in  their  name. 
That  a  man  may  justly  wonder  at  the  spirit  of  con- 
tradiction in  those  people  that  pretend  baptism  does 
better  without  them,  and  do  practise  accordingly : 
as  if  they  had  authority  to  entitle  persons  to  the 
kingdom  of  God,  whether  they  do,  when  they  come 
to  age,  keep  the  commandments  or  not. 

These  professions  were  of  two  sorts,  relating  to 
the  two  general  duties  of  a  Christian  :  1.  Re- 
nouncing of  wickedness  ;  and,  2.  Faith,  with  obedi- 
ence to  God.  Every  one  that  would  be  entered 
into  the  holy  covenant  of  Christianity,  must  pro- 
mise to  renounce  the  idolatry  and  false  worship 
then  used  in  the  world,  and  all  other  wickedness. 
The  Scripture  phrase  is.  Repent  and  be  baptized. 
Pliny's  Letter  to  Trajan",  concerning  the  Christians,  lo. 
is,  that  all  the  ill  that  he  (by  examining  some  that 
had  been  of  their  sect  and  were  come  off  from  it) 
could  find  in  them,  was,  '  That  they  would  not 
*  sacrifice  to  the  gods ;  that  they  kept  assemblies 
'  before  day,  in  which  they  sang  hymns  of  praise 
'  to  Christ  as  their  God ;  and  bound  themselves  (not 

t  [See  vol.  i.  page  33 — 38.]  i>  Lib.  x.  Epist.  97. 

F  f  2 


436  Renunciations  used  at  Baptism. 

CHAP.  '  to  anv  ill  tliino^,  that  he  could  hear  of,  but)  in  a 
IX.  ^  »'  '  /      ^ 

'  sacrament'  (that  is  Pliny's  word ;  it  signified  with 


thrapo^'^'^  '  tli6ii^  an  oatli  or  solemn  obligation)  '  not  to  be 
sties.  '  guilty  of  any  theft,  robbery,  adultery,  cheating, 
'  treachery,'  &c.  It  was  probably  the  obligation 
entered  into  at  baptism,  to  which  he  refers ;  as 
having  heard  some  general  reports  of  their  usage  in 
40.  that  matter.  Justin  Martyr,  in  the  passage  which  I 
recited  in  the  First  Part,  ch.  ii.  §.  3,  speaking  of  such 
as  they  admitted  into  their  society,  describes  them 
thus ;  '  They  who  are  persuaded  and  do  believe  that 
'  those  things  which  are  taught  by  us  are  true,  and 

*  do  promise  to  live  according  to  them,'  &c. 

The  particular  words  in  which  this  profession 
was  made,  were,  by  the  account  of  the  eldest  au- 
thors that  mention  them,  much  the  same  as  are 
used  now  ;  only  shorter,  and  with  some  little  variety 
in  the  several  churches.  TertuUian,  in  the  place 
100.  lately  quoted^,  recites  them  thus  :  '  We  do  re- 
'  nounce  the  Devil,  and  his  pomp,  and  his  angels.' 
And  he  has  the  said  words,  without  any  alteration, 
in  his  book  de  Spectaculis^  cap.  4 ;  and  in  the  book 
de  Idololatria,   though  at   ch.  6.  he  mentions  only 

*  the  Devil  and  his  angels  ;'  yet  at  ch.  18,  he  adds, 
'  since  you  have  abjured  the  pomp  of  the  Devil,'  &c. 
So  that  it  is  probable  those  were  the  very  words  of 

110.  the  form  of  renunciation  in  the  church  of  Carthage 
at  that  time.  Origen  brings  in  the  Devil  triumph- 
ing over  a  wicked  Christian  >';  '  Lo  !  this  man  was 
'  called  a  Christian,  and  was  signed  on  the  forehead 

*  with  Christ's  mark  ;  but  he  had  in  his  heart  my 
'  precepts  and  designs.     This  is  the  man  that  at  his 

*  De  Corona  Militis,  cap.  3 . 

>'  In  Psalm.  38.  Homil.  2.  [Op.  torn.  ii.  p.  698.] 


Renunciations  used  at  Baptism.  437 

*  baptism  "renounced  me  and  my  works;"  but  af-  ^^^^• 

'  terward  engaged    himself  in    all    my    works,    and 

*  obeyed   my  laws.'     But   Homil.   12.   in  Nimier os,  th^lpo-^'^ 
lie   names  them  thus ;     '  his    pomp,  his   works,   his  ^^^^^' 

*  services,  and  pleasures.' 

In  the  church  of  Jerusalem  the  form,  as  we  read 
in  St.  Cyril  ^,  was ;  '  I  renoimce  thee,  oh  Satan,  and  240. 

*  all  thy  works,  all  thy  pomp,  and  all  thy  service.' 
And  he  explains  the  works  of  the  Devil  thus ;  '  under 
'  the  name  of  the  Devil's  works  is  comprehended 
'  all  sin.'  And  he  bids  them  mind,  that  '  what  they 
'  say  at  that  solemn  time  is  written  down  in  God's 
'  book  ;  so  that  Mdiat  they  shall  practise  afterward 
'  to  the  contrary,  will  bring  them   under  the  judg- 

*  ment  of  deserters.'     St.  Chrysostom  gives   us   the  300- 
form  of  the   church   of  Antioch   to   the  same  pur- 
pose ^ ;  *  I  renounce  thee,  oh  Satan,  and  thy  pomp, 

*  and  thy  service,  and  thy  angels.' 

St.  Cyprian,  in  the  passage  that  I  recited  out  of  150. 
him   in   the  First  Part,   chap.  vi.  §.   11,   styles  it, 

*  renouncing  the  Devil  and  the  world ;'  and  he 
mentions  it  in  the  same  words.  Lid.  de  Bono 
PatienticB,  §.  7- 

When  it  was  an  infant  that  was  baptized,  these 
professions  were  made  in  his  name  and  stead,  by  his 
parents,  or  others  that  stood  as  sponsors  or  godfa- 
thers for  him  :  as  appears  by  the  words  of  Ter-ioo. 
tullian  which  I  recited  part  i.  ch.  4.  <§.  5  :  where  he 
objects  that  '  the  godfathei's  are  by  this  means 
'  brought  into  danger :  because  they  may  either  fail 
'  of  their  promises  by  death,  or  be  deceived  by  a 

z  Catech.  Myst.  i.  [p.  307,  308.  edit.  Benedict.] 
^  In  Epist.    ad   Coloss.   Homil.  6.    [Op.  torn.  xi.  p.  370.    edit. 
Montfaucon.] 


438  JExorcising. 

CHAP.  '  child's  proving  wicked.'     Mistaking  the  design  of 
'     the  thing  so  far,  as   to   think   that   the  godfather 
ti^Tlpo-^''  ^^^^^^  to  the  peril  of  that.     And  among  other  fa- 
sties.         thers  that  lived  a  little  after,  the  mention  of  the 
godfathers  and  of  the  answers  made  by  them  in  the 
name  of  the  infant  is  so  frequent,  and  I  have  cited 
so  many  passages  where  it  is  occasionally  mention- 
ed, that  there  is  no  need  of  more.     Only  in  some  of 
them  it  may  be  observed,  that  there  were,  as  I  said, 
in  several  churches  several  variations  of  the  words 
of  this  renunciation.     St.  Austin  ^,   lib.  i.   de   Pec- 
3oo.catoru?n  Meritis,   cap.  19?  says;   'that   infants   do 
'  profess  repentance  by  the  words  of  those  that  bring 
'  them,  when  they  do  by  them  renounce  the  Devil 
*  and  this  world.'     And  Epist.  23  %  he  says,  it  was 
asked  among  other  things ;  '  Does  this  child  turn 
'  to  God  V 

The  requiring  these  obligations  of  the  baptized 
person  was  called  the  exorcising  him,  or  putting 
him  to  his  oath.  Which  being  become  the  common 
word,  it  was  so  called  also  in  the  case  of  infants. 
St.  Austin  pleads  against  the  Pelagians  '^,  that  '  it  is 
'  in  a  real  meaning,  and  not  in  a  mockery,  that  the 
'  power  of  the  Devil  is  exorcised  [or  abjured]  in  in- 
'  fants,  and  they  do  renounce  it  by  the  mouths  of 
'  those  that  bring  them,  not  being  capable  of  doing 
'  it  by  their  own ;  that  being  delivered  from  the 
'  power  of  darkness,  they  may  be  translated  into 
'  the  kingdom  of  their  Lord.' 

In  the  later  times  of  the  church  of  Rome,  this 
exorcising  has  been  accompanied  with  so  many  odd 

b  [Op.  torn.  X.  p.  II.  edit.  Benedict.] 

c  [Ibid.  torn.  ii.  p.  263.  Epist.  98.  sect.  7.  edit.  Benedict.] 

''  De  Nuptiis,  lib.  i.  cap.  20.  [sect.  22.  Op.  torn.  x.  p.  291.] 


The  Profession  of  Faith.     Baptism.  439 

tricks  of  their  invention,  that  the  word  now  sounds   chap. 

IX. 

ill  in  the  ears  of  protestants :  and  they  take  the  name 


exorcist  to  signify  something  like  that  of  coiyurer  ^^1\^q^^ 
in  the  vulgar  acceptation.  But  as  both  these  words '**'^^" 
in  their  original  signification  do  import  no  more 
than  *  the  requiring  of  an  oath  or  solemn  promise :' 
so  the  use  of  exorcising  formerly  was  no  more  than 
I  have  described,  and  the  protestants  do  practise ; 
save  that  they  observed  some  peculiar  gestures,  pos- 
tures, and  actions,  in  the  time  of  doing  it,  which 
are  not  worth  the  particular  naming. 

X.  They  were  bound  also  to  profess  the  Christian 
FAITH.  The  words  in  which  this  was  done  in 
every  particular  church,  were  the  same  which  that 
church  used  for  a  form  of  a  Christian  creed.  The 
form  of  the  creed  was  not  in  all  churches  the  same 
in  words,  but  in  substance  it  was.  It  is  great  pity 
that  there  is  not  left  any  copy  of  any  very  ancient 
creed.  We  know  both  by  the  Scripture,  and  by 
their  earliest  writings,  what  was  the  substance  of 
their  faith  :  but  we  should  be  glad  to  have  the  very 
form  of  words  which  was  used  in  the  offices  of  each 
church,  and  according  to  which  they  put  the  inter- 
rogatories to  the  competents  at  baptism.  We  have 
some  clauses  of  these  left :  but  no  entire  form  of  a 
creed,  till  that  which  was  agreed  on  at  the  first 
general  meeting  of  Christians  from  all  parts  of  the 
world,  at  Nice,  anno  Dom.  325.  This  is  the  eldest  225- 
copy  of  any  public  creed  that  is  extant. 

In  the  oldest  books  of  all  that  we  have  of  the  Fa- 
thers, it  is  as  it  is  in  the  books  of  Scripture :  the 
articles  of  our  faith  are  found  scattered  up  and  down, 
but  not  collected  into  any  one  short  draught  or  sum- 
mary.    There  is  nothing   more  probable  than  the 


440  Substance  of  the  Ancient  Creeds 

CHAP,   opinion  of  those  learned  men,  who  judge  that  at 
—U—  first  there  was  no  other  creed  necessary  for  the  bap- 
^Ta'^o-"  tized  to  repeat,  than   that   which   is  collected  from 
sties.         Q^j.  Saviour's  own  words,  Matt,  xxviii.  19,  viz.  that 
they   should    say,  /  believe  in  the  Father,   and   in 
the  Son,  and  in  the  Holy  Spirit.     But  the  heresies 
that  arose,  did  not  suffer  the  church  offices  to  con- 
tinue in  that  simplicity  and  brevity. 

I  think  there  is  nothing  more  edifying  to  a  Chris- 
tian, than  to  i^erceive  that  the  substance  of  the 
faith  once  for  all  delivered  to  the  saints  has  con- 
tinued the  same  in  the  catholic  church  from  the 
Scripture-times  till  now.  Therefore  I  will  take  the 
pains  to  set  down  some  of  the  most  remarkable 
places  out  of  such  Christian  writers,  as  are  elder 
than  any  copies  of  creeds  now  extant,  which  do  in 
short  contain  the  sum  of  their  belief;  and  agreeable 
to  which  their  creed  proposed  to  the  catechumens 
must  have  been. 
40-  Justin  Martyr  apologizes  for  the  Christians,  that 
they  were  not  atheists,  (as  they  were  by  some  tra- 
duced to  be  ;)  for  though  they  did  not  go  to  the 
temples,  nor   worship   the    gods ;   '  Yet,'  says    he  % 

*  the  true  God  and  Father  of  righteousness,  &c.  and 

*  his  Son,  that  came  forth  from  him,  and  has  taught 
'  us  and  the  angels,  &c.  these  things  ;  and  the  pro- 
'  phetic  Spirit,  we  do  worship  and  adore.'  And 
having  said  (in  the  passage  of  the  same  apology, 
which  I  quoted  in  the  First  Part,  ch.  ii.  ^.  3,  about 
the  Christians'  manner  of  baptism,)  that  they  were 
baptized  in  the  name  of  these  Three  ;  he  adds  this 
further    explication  ;     '  There    is    named    over    the 

e  Apol.  2.  [Apolog-.  1.  sect.  6.  secundum   edit.   Benedict.   Op. 
Justin,  p.  47.] 


given  in  sho)'t  Rules  hy  the  Fathers.  441 

'  person   [or,  by  the  person]  that  has  a  mind  to  be  chap. 
'  regenerated,   the   name  of  the  Father,   God,  and  __1_ 
'  Lord  of  all  f.'     Then  after  a  little  digression,  of  the  T'^"'"  ^^*^'" 

o  '  the  apo- 

reason  why  the  Christians  do  not  affix  any  name  tos^^^^s. 
their  God,  as  it  was  customary  for  the  heathens ;  as 
Jupiter,  Bacchus,  &c.,  he  goes  on ;    *  And  also  the 
'  enlightened  person  [or  baptized  person]  is  washed 

*  in  the  name    of  Jesus  Christ,  that  was   crucified 

*  under   Pontius   Pilate,  and    in    the   name    of  the 

*  Holy  Spirit,  who  by  the  prophets  foretold  the 
'  things  concerning  Jesus.' 

Irenajus  having  to  do  with  the  Valentinians,  who  67. 
taught  that  there  was  another  God,  above  the  Crea- 
tor of  the  world,  and  when  they  were  confuted  by 
Scripture,  appealed  to  some  secret  traditions  ;  says^, 
'  It  is  easy  for  any  one  to  know  the  tradition  of  the 
'  apostles  declared   in   all  the  world :    and  we  are 

*  able  to  reckon  up  those  who  were  by  the  apostles 

*  ordained  bishops  in  the  churches,  and  their  succes-80. 

*  sors  to  this  time ;  who  never  taught  any  such 
'  thing.'  Then  he  recites  the  succession  of  some 
churches  from  the  apostles,  Peter,  Paul,  John,  &c., 
and  says ;  '  suppose  the  apostles  had  left  us  no 
'  writings,  ought  we  not  to  follow  the  order  of  that 
'  tradition,  which  they  delivered  to  those,  to  whom 

*  they  committed  the  churches  ?'  And  to  that  pur- 
pose, he  instances  in  many  Christians  in  the  barba- 
rous nations,  that  had  no  writings ;  and  yet  had 
the  true  faith  by  tradition  :  that  is,  says  he ; 

'  Believing  in  one  God,  who  made  heaven  and 
'  earth,  and  all  things  in  them  by  Jesus  Christ,  the 
'  Son  of  God  ;  who  out  of  highest  love  to  his  crea- 

f  [Ibid.  sect.  61.]  ^  Lib.  iii.  cap,  3,  4. 


442  Substance  of  the  Ancient  Creeds 

CHAP.   '  tures  vouchsafed  to  be  born  of  a  virgin,  uniting  in 
'      '  himself  [or  in  his  own  person]  man  to  God,  and 


Year  after  i  suffered  Under  Pontius  Pilate,  and  rose  arain,  and 

the  apo-  O         •' 

sties.  <  was  received  up  in  great  glory,  and  will  come  a 
'  Saviour  of  those  that  are  saved,  and  a  judge  of 
'  those  that  are  judged  ;  and  will  send  into  eternal 

*  fire  all  that  deprave  his  truth,  and  despise  his 
'  Father,  and  his  coming.' 

Also  on  much  the  like  occasion  at  another  place  "^j 
having  given  a  long  account  how  strange  things 
some  heretics  held,  he  says ;  '  Any  one,  that  does 

*  but  keep  in  his  mind  unaltered  that  rule  of  faith 
'  into  which  he  was  baptized,'  will  easily  perceive 
their  falsehood.  And  then  a  little  after  gives  the 
account  of  the  catholic  faith  :  thus  ; 

'  For   the   church   that  is  extended   over   all  the 

*  world  to  the  ends  of  the  earth,  having  received 
'  from  the  apostles,  and  their  disciples  the  faith ; 
'  which  is ; 

'  In  one  God  the  Father  Almighty,  that  made 
'  heaven  and  earth,  and  the  sea,  and  all  things  in 
'  them :  and  in  one  Jesus  Christ,  the  Son  of  God, 
'  who  was  for  our  salvation  incarnated :  and  in  the 
'  Holy  Spirit,  who  foretold  by  the  prophets  the  dis- 
'  pensations  of  God,  and  the  coming,  the  birth  from 
'  a  virgin,  the  suffering,  the  resurrection  from  the 
'  dead,  and  the  bodily  ascension  into  heaven,  of  Jesus 
.  *  Christ  our  beloved  Lord ;  and  his  coming  from 
'  heaven   in   the  glory  of  the  Father  to  restore  all 

*  things,  and  to  raise  again  all  the  bodies  of  man- 
'  kind :  that  to  Jesus  Christ,  our  Lord,  and  God, 
'  and  Saviour,  and  King,  every  knee  may,  according 
'  to  the  good  pleasure  of  the  invisible  Father,  bow ; 

h  Lib.  i.  cap.  i  et  2. 


given  in  short  Rules  by  the  Fathers.  443 

'  both  of  things  in  heaven,  and  things  in  earth,  and   chap. 

TX 

'  things  under    the  earth  ;    and   every   tongue  may 


'  confess  to  him ;  and  he  may  pass  a  righteous  sen-  ^^^^  ^^*"" 
'  tence  on  all;  and  may  send  the  spiritual  wicked- ^'les. 
'  nesses,  and  the  angels  that  sinned  and  apostatized, 
'  and  all  ungodly,  and  unrighteous,  and  unjust  men, 
'  and   blasphemers,  into   everlasting  fire  ;    and  give 
'  life  to  the  righteous  and  holy,  and  to  such  as  have 

*  kept  his  commandments,  and  have  continued  in  his 
'  love  (some  from  the  beginning,  and  some  by  re- 
'  pentance),  and  may  bestow  upon  them  immortality 
'  and  eternal  glory.' 

This  faith,  he  says,  the  church  having  received, 
keeps,  '  as  if  they  had  all  one  heart  and  one  soul :' 
and  that  neither  the  churches  in  Germany,  nor  those 
in  Spain,  or  in  France,  or  in  the  East,  or  in  Egypt, 
or  in  Africa,  or  under  the  middle  of  the  world,  had 
any  other  belief :  and  that  a  learned  preacher  would 
deliver  no  more  than  this ;  nor  an  ignorant  layman 
any  less. 

Tertullian  writing  against  Praxeas  (who,  not  be- 
ing able  to  believe  three  persons  in  one  numerical 
essence,  taught  that  Father,  Son,  and  Holy  Spirit 
are  but  one  person ;  and  consequently,  that  the 
Father  was  incarnated,  and  was  that  Jesus  Christ 
that  died),  opposes  to  him  the  faith  of  the  church  as 
it  had  always  been  held  ;  thus' : 

'  We  believe  that  there  is  but  one  God :  but  yet 
'  with  this   dispensation  or   economy,  that  this  one 

*  God  has  his  Son,  his  ivord  coming  forth  from  him ; 
'  by  whom  all  things  were  made,  and  without  him 
'  was  not  any  thing  made.  That  he  was  by  the 
'  Father  sent  into  the  Virgin,  and  of  her  born,  man 

'  Cap.  2. 


444  Substance  of  the  Ancient  Creeds 

CHAP.  *  and  God,  Son  of  Man  and  Son  of  God,  and  named 

^^-      '  Jesus  the  Christ.     That  this  is  he  that  suffered, 

Year  after  <  died,  and  was  buried  accordinsr  to  the  Scriptures, 

the  apo-  ,        .  . 

sties.         '  and  raised  again  by  the  Father,  and  taken  up  into 
'  heaven,  and  sits  at  the  right  hand  of  the  Father, 

*  and  will  come  to  judge  the  living  and  the  dead. 

*  Who  sent  from  thence,  according  to  his  promise, 

*  from  the  Father  the  Holy  Spirit,  the  Comforter, 
'  the  sanctifier  of  the  faith  of  those  that  believe  in 

*  the  Father,  the  Son,  and  the  Holy  Spirit. 

'  This  rule  has  been  derived  down  from  the  be- 
'  ginning  of  the  Gospel,  before  even  the  eldest  of  the 
'  heretics ;  much  more  before  Praxeas,  who  is  but 

*  of  yesterday.' 

And  then,  reciting  the  objection  of  Praxeas,  viz. 
that  the  unity  of  God  can  no  otherwise  be  main- 
tained but  by  holding  Father,  Son,  and  Holy  Spirit 
to  be  one  person  :  he  answers ; 

*  As  if  they  were  not  in  our  sense  all  one,  inas- 
'  much  as  all  are  of  one,  that  is,  as  to  unity  of  the 

*  substance :   and  yet  the  mystery  of  the  economy 

*  may  be  preserved,  which  dispenses  the  unity  into 

*  a  Trinity :  ranking  three ;  Father,  Son,  and  Holy 
<  Spirit.  "  Tres,  non  statu,  sed  gradu ;  nee  sub- 
'  stantia,    sed    forma  ;    nee    potestate,    sed    specie." 

*  Three,  not  in  condition,  but  in  order  [or  rank]  ; 
'  not  in  substance,  but  in  form  [or  mode]  ;  and  not 
'  in  power,  but  in  species  [which  word  I  know  not 
'  how  to  translate,  being  on  so  awful  a  subject]  ; 
'  but  in  one  substance,  and  of  one  condition,  and  of 
'  one  power ;  because  they  are  but  one  God ;  out  of 
'  whom  those  ranks,  forms,  and  species  are  reckoned 
'  under  the  names  of  Father,  Son,  and  Holy 
'  Spirit.' 


(fiven  in  short  Rules  hy  the  Fathers.  445 

The  same  author  in  another  book  ^,  writino-  ao^ainst   chap. 
heretics   in   general,  gives,  in   opposition   to  all   of 


them,  this  summary  of  the  Christian  faith  :  Jrapl*^'^ 

'  That  we  may  declare  what  we  hold  :  the  rule  of '^'^i^*- 
'  faith  is  ;  to  believe  that  there  is  but  one  God,  and 
'  no  other  but  the  Maker  of  the  world,  who  created 
'  all  things  out  of  nothing  by  his   ivord  first   of  all 

*  sent  forth :  that  that  tvord,  being  called  his  Son, 
^  was    in    divers    manners    seen    by    the    patriarchs 

*  under  the  name  of  God,  was  in  the  prophets  always 

*  heard,  and  at  last  being  by  the  Spirit  and  power 

*  of  God  brought  into  the  Virgin  Mary,  and  made 
'  flesh  in  her  womb,  and  born  of  her,  was  Jesus  the 
'  Christ ;  and   that   then  he  preached   the  new  law 

*  and  new  promise  of  the  kingdom  of  heaven ;  did 

*  miracles  ;  was  crucified  ;  rose  again  the  third  day ; 
'  was  carried  into  heaven ;  sat  down  on  the  right 
'  hand  of  God ;  sent  in  his  stead   the  power  of  the 

*  Holy  Spirit  to  lead  them  that  believe ;  that  he  will 

*  come  in  glory  to  receive  the  saints  into  the  enjoy- 
'  ment  of  eternal   life   and   the   heavenly  promises  ; 

*  and  to  adjudge  the  profane  to  eternal  fire  ;  having 
'  first  raised  both  from  the  dead,  and  restored  to 
'  them  their  flesh.' 

A  shorter  abstract,  yet  drawn  by  the  same  man 
upon  another  occasion ',  is  this  : 

'  The  rule  of  faith  is  but  one,  altogether  unalter- 

*  able,  and  not  to  be  mended  :  that  is,  of  believing 
'  in  one  God  Almighty,  maker  of  the  world  ;  and  in 
'  his   Son   Jesus   Christ,  born   of  the  Virgin   j\Iary, 

*  crucified  under  Pontius  Pilate,  who  arose  the  third 

*  day  from  the  dead,  was  taken  up  into  heaven,  sits 

^  De  Prsescriptionibus,  cap.  13. 
1  De  Velandis  Virginibus,  cap.  i. 


no. 


446  Substance  of  the  Ancient  Creeds 

GHAP.  «  now  at  the  right  hand  of  the  Father,  will  come  to 

1^  '  judge  the  living  and  the  dead,  by  raising  the  flesh 

tlraVo."  'itself  to  life  again.' 

sties.  Origen  being  to  write  a  book  of  the  *  Principles 

of  Religion,'  makes  a  preface  *"  to  this  purpose ; 
that  because  of  the  many  heretical  opinions,  it  was 
necessary  to  set  down  that  which  is  '  the  certain 
'  line  and  manifest  rule ;  and  by  it  to  inquire  of  the 
'  rest.'     This    he    calls   '  the    ecclesiastical    doctrine 

*  delivered  down  from  the  apostles  in  the  order  of 
'  succession,  and  continuing  still  in  the  church.' 
And  whereas  some  men  that  had  better  gifts  than 
ordinary,  might  study  and  know  some  other  things 
also ;  that  this  was  '  delivered  by  the  apostles  for 
'  the  use  of  all,  even  the  dullest  Christians.'  And 
he  says,  '  It  is  this  : 

*  First,  that  there  is  one  God,  who  has  made  and 
'  ordered  all  things,  creating  them  out  of  nothing, 
'  the  God  of  all  holy  men  from  the  creation  :  of 
'  Adam,  Moses,'  &c. 

'  That   this  God,  who  is  both  just  and  merciful, 

*  the  Father  of  our  Lord   Jesus  Christ,  gave  both 

*  the  Law  and  the  Prophets,  and  also  the  Gospel ; 
'  the  same  being  the  God  both  of  the  Old  and  New 
'  Testament. 

'  That  Jesus  Christ,  who  came,  was  begotten  of  the 
'  Father  before  all  the  creation :  that  he  ministered 
'  to  [or  acted  under]  the  Father  in  the  creation  of 
'  all  things  :  for  by  him  all  things  were  made.  That 
'  he  in  the  last  days  humbled  himself  to  be  made 
'  man  :  he  was  made  flesh  when  he  was  God,  and 
'  continued  to  be  man  while  he  was  God.  He  took 
'  a  body  like  unto   ours,  differing   only  in  this,  that 

"■■  Hepl  apx<^v.   Prsefat.  [Op.  torn.  i.  p.  47.] 


given  in  short  Rules  hy  the  Fathers.  447 

'  it  was  by  the  Holy  Spirit  born  of  a  virgin.     And  chap. 
*  that  this  Jesus  the  Christ  was  born  and  suffered      ^^' 


*  truly,  not  in  appearance   only,  but  died  truly  the  V*^^'"'*^*^'". 
'  common  death ;  and  did  truly  rise  from  the  dead :  sties. 

'  and  after  his  resurrection  conversed  with  his  disci- 

*  pies  ;  and  was  taken  up. 

*  Then  they  have  also  delivered,  that  the  Holy 
'  Spirit  is  joined  with  the  Father  and  the  Son,  in 
'  honour  and  dignity,' 

It  may  be  here  observed  by  the  by,  first,  how 
Origen  explains  that  phrase  of  St.  Paul,  Phil.  ii.  7, 
Being  in  the  form  of  God,  &c.  eKevwa-ev  eavrov,  Sec. 
He  in  the  last  days,  '  seipsum  exinaniens,  homo 
'  factus  est,'  humbled  [or  emptied]  himself  to  he 
made  man.  He  does  not  interpret  it,  that  when  he 
was  a  human  soul,  or  angel  in  heaven,  he  humbled 
himself  to  take  an  earthly  body.  Secondly,  how 
Rufinus  according  to  Origen's  sense  translates  irpw- 
TOTo/co?  Traa-}]?  KricreMg,  Col.  i.  15 ;  he  does  not  say. 
The  firstborn  of  every  creature ;  much  less  does 
he  say,  *  The  first  of  God's  creation.'  But,  '  ante 
'  omnem  creaturam  natus  ex  Patre.'  '  Born  [or 
'  begotten]  of  the  Father  before  all  the  creation.' 

These  are  some  of  the  most  ancient  passages, 
wherein  the  authors  undertake  to  give  an  account 
in  few  words  of  the  faith,  into  which  Christians 
were  baptized.  They  do  not  say  that  these  were 
the  very  forms  of  the  creeds,  by  which  the  interro- 
gatories were  put ;  but  they  must  have  been  to  this 
purpose.  And  whereas  Tertullian  says  in  the  place 
I  quoted  before,  that  the  custom  was  for  the  baptized 
person  '  to  answer  some  few  words  more  than  those 
'  which  our  Saviour  in  the  Gospel  has  enjoined  ;'  we 
may  partly  see  here  what  they  w^ere.  For  whereas  our 


448  Clauses  added  to  the  Creeds. 

CHAP.   Saviour  had  enjoined  only  those  words,  of  believing 

*  in  the  Father,  the  Son,  and  the  Holy  Sj^irit :'  and 

thTapo-"  whereas  some  heretics  in  those  first  ages,  though 
sties.  keeping  those  words,  yet  had  introduced  monstrous 
opinions ;  some  of  the  Father,  that  he  was  not 
the  God  of  the  Old  Testament,  but  another;  and 
some,  of  the  Son,  that  he  was  not  really  a  man, 
nor  did  really  die,  as  some  taught ;  or  that  he  was 
not  really  God,  as  others :  the  church  did  examine 
the  candidates,  not  only  whether  they  believed  '  in 
'  the  Father,'  but  whether  they  believed  him  to  be 
'  the  maker  of  heaven  and  earth.'  And  not  only 
whether  they  believed  '  in  the  Son,'  but  whether 
they  believed  his  divinity,  incarnation,  death,  resur- 
rection, &c.  On  these  occasions  it  was,  that  the 
ordinary  forms  of  the  creed  were  augmented  by 
some  words  added  for  explication  sake.  And  these 
were  not  in  every  church  the  same  words :  but  each 
church  added  such  words  as  were  necessary  to  ob- 
viate the  heresies  that  arose  in  their  country,  and 
were  in  any  particular  contrary  to  the  fundamentals 
of  the  faith. 

And  besides  such  explications  concerning  each 
person  of  the  holy  Trinity,  they  added  also  some 
other  necessary  articles  of  Christian  faith  to  the 
creed,  which  the  baptized  person  must  make  pro- 
fession of.  So  we  see  in  these  passages  (beside  the 
doctrine  of  the  Trinity)  '  the  resurrection  of  the 
'  dead,'  and  the  '  future  judgment,'  and  *  eternal  life' 
plainly  delivered.  And  more  positively  than  any  of 
loo.  the  rest,  the  article  '  of  the  church'  is  by  Tertullian 
mentioned,  as  recited  at  baptism,  in  his  book  on 
that  subject "  ;  where  having  said  that  '  our  faith  is 

'^  Lib.  de  BaptismOj  c.  6. 


Clauses  added  to  the  Creeds.  449 

*  sealed  [i.e.  we  are  baptized]  in  the  Father,  Son,  chap. 

IX 

*  and  Holy  Spirit ;'  he  adds,  '  and  when  the  testi-  __1^_ 

*  mony  of  our  faith,  and  promise  of  our  salvation,  ^^^'^  ^^^^'' 

*  are    assured    by  these  three,  there    is    necessarily  sties. 

*  added  a  mention  of  the  church.  For  where  the 
'  three,  that  is.  Father,  Son,  and  Holy  Spirit,  are, 
'  there  is  the  church,  which  is  the  body  of  the 
'  three.'  And  also  the  same  man,  in  another 
treatise  ^  mentioning  occasionally  the  church,  calls 
it,    '  Sanctam    ecclesiam,    in    quam    repromisimus,' 

*  the  holy  church,  the  belief  [or  owning]  whereof 
'  we  have  vowed.'     So  that  it  is  plain,  this  article 

*  of  the  church'  was  in  some  of  the  most  ancient 
creeds.  The  meaning  of  the  profession  of  this 
article,  which  they  had  was,  '  I  own  the  catholic 
'  church,'  i.  e.  I  am  of  no  sect  or  schism,  but  do 
adhere  to  the  communion  and  unity  of  the  body : 
in  explication  of  which  sense  were  afterward  added 
these  words ;  '  the  communion  of  saints  :'  that  is, 
of  Christians.  This  was  their  meaning  of  it;  and 
they  would  baptize  nobody  without  it.  In  what 
sense  the  sectaries,  that  do  renounce  this  commu- 
nion, and  yet  still  say  those  words  with  their  mouth, 
do  take  them,  I  cannot  imagine.  As  for  baptism, 
I  think  they  do,  many  of  them,  administer  it  without 
any  creed  at  all. 

About  fifty  years  after  the  time  of  Tertullian,  we   150 
have  in  St.  Cyprian  the  form  in  which  the  baptized 
were  interrogated  in  his  time  concerning  those  other 
articles,  that  followed  the  confession  of  the  Trinity ; 
or  at  least  a  part  of  it. 

In  his  sixty-ninth  epistleP,  disputing  against  such 

o   Lib.  V.  contra  Marcionem,  cap.  4. 

P  Juxta  edit.  Oxon.  [Ep.  76.  in  edit.  Benedict.] 

WALL,  VOL.  II.  G  g 


450  Clauses  added  to  the  Creeds. 

CHAP.  a8   would    have    baptism    given    by   the    Novatian 


IX. 


Year  after 


schismatics  to  be  good  baptism,  he  says 


thel^o  '  I^  ^°y  o^®  object,  and  say  that  Novatian  holds 

sties.  i  ^|jg   same  rule   as   the   catholic   church    does,  and 

'  baptizes  by  the  same  creed   that  we  do ;  that  he 

'  owns   the   same  God    the  Father,  the    same  Son 

*  Christ,  the  same  Holy  Spirit ;  and  therefore  that 

*  he  may  baptize,  since  he  seems  not  to  differ  from 
'  us  in  the  interrogatories  of  baptism  : — Let  him 
'  that  objects  this,  know ;  first,  that  the  schismatics 
'  have  not  the  same  rule  of  the  creed  with  us,  nor 
'  the  same  interrogation ;  for  when  they  say,  "  Dost 
'  thou  believe  the  forgiveness  of  sins,  and  the  life 
'  everlasting  by  the  holy  church  ? "  they  express 
'  a  lie  in  their  interrogation,  since  they  have  not 
'  [or  own  not]  the  church.' 

And  in  his  next  epistle,  to  the  same  purpose : 
'  When  we  say,  "  Dost  thou  believe  the  life  ever- 

*  lasting  and  the  forgiveness  of  sins  by  the  holy 
'  church,"  [or,  by  the  means  used  in  the  holy 
'  church]  V  &c. 

XI.  From  these  traces  we  may  perceive  what 
was  the  substance  of  the  most  ancient  creeds  in  the 
several  churches :  but  we  come  now  nigh  those 
times,  since  which  there  are  entire  copies  of  the 
public  creeds  remaining.  The  eldest  of  which  is, 
225.  as  I  said,  that  which  was  at  the  council  of  Nice 
agreed  on,  as  a  form  to  be  owned  by  all  churches. 
It  was  this  1 : 

'  We  believe  in  one  God  the  Father  Almighty, 
'  maker  of  all  things  visible  and  invisible.  And  in 
'  one  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  the  Son  of  God :  begotten 

*  of  the  Father :  his  only  begotten ;  that  is,  of  the 

q  Eusebii  Epist.  apud  Socrat.  Hist.  Eccles.  lib.  i.  c.  8. 


The  Nicene  Creed.  '451 

*  substance  [or  essence]  of  the  Father:  God  of  God  :  c'hap. 

IX. 

*  light  of  light :  very  God  of  very  God  :   begotten, 


*  not  made  :  being  co-essential  [or  of  one  substance]  thrapo-^^ 
'  with  the  Father:  by  whom  all  things  were  made, '**^^''*' 

*  both  things  in  heaven,  and  things  in  earth.     Who 

*  for  us  men,  and  for  our  salvation,  came  down,  and 

*  was  incarnate,  and  made  man.  He  suffered :  and 
'  rose  again  the  third  day.     He  went  into  heaven. 

*  He  will  come  to  judge  the  living  and  the  dead. 

'  And  in  the  Holy  Spirit. 

'  And  those  that  say,  that  there  ever  was  a  time 

*  when  he  [Christ]  was  not :  or,  that  before  he  was 
'  begotten,  he  was  not ;  or,  that  he  was  made  out  of 
'  nothing ;  or,  do  say  that  the  Son  of  God  is  of  any 
'  other  substance  or  essence  ;  or,  that  he  was  created ; 

*  or,  is  changeable,  or  alterable:  such  men  the  catholic 

*  and   apostolic  church   of  God   does   renounce  [or 

*  anathematize].' 

Wlien  the  council  of  Constantinople,  which  was 
in  the  year  382,  asserts  this  creed  to  be  the  an-  282. 
cientest,  (as  they  do  in  a  synodical  epistle^  written 
to  the  church  of  Rome,)  they  mean,  it  is  the  an- 
cientest  of  any  that  had  been  established  at  any 
general  meeting.  But  the  several  churches  must 
have  had  forms  for  the  use  of  baptism  before. 

But  yet  the  creeds  used  before  in  the  several 
churches  must  have  been  much  to  the  same  pur- 
pose :  only  in  this  there  are  some  expressions  added 
particularly  against  the  heresy  of  Arius.  Eusebius'  22s- 
creed,  which  he  drew  up  and  offered  to  the  council 
of  Nice,  as  the  faith  which  he  says^  '  he  had 
'  received  from  the  bishops  before  him,  and  at  his  '85, 

«■  Theodoret.  Hist.  Eccles.  lib.  v.  c.  9. 
s  Epist.  apud  Socrat.  lib.  i.  c.  8. 
Gg2 


452  Eusehius'  Creed. 

CHAP.  '  catechising,    and    when    he    was    baptized  ;    and 

'. '  which  he  had    held   and    taught,  both  while   he 

Sfapo^!^'^  '  was  a  presbyter,  and  since  he  had  been  a  bishop,' 
sties.         differed  but  little.     He  says,  '  the  council  accepted 

'  of  his  words,  making  some  additions.'     The  form 

which  he  had  offered  was  this  : 

'  We  believe  in  one  God,  the  Father  Almighty, 

'  maker  of  all  things  visible  and  invisible.     And  in 

*  one  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  the  Word  of  God,  God  of 
'  God,  light  of  light,  life  of  life,  the  only  begotten 
'  Son,  born  before  all  the  creation,  begotten  of  God 

*  the  Father  before  all  worlds,  by  whom  all  things 
'  were  made,'  &c.  Here  are  recited  in  the  body  of 
the  creed  those  words  of  the  apostle.  Col.  i.  15.  Hiow- 
TOTOKov  Trda-}]?  /cTiVew?.  And  it  is  observable  how  they 
are  paraphrased  in  the  next  words :  Trpb  Travrcov  alwvwv 
CK  Tov  Oeov  Uarpo?  yeyevvrjixevov  :  begotten  of  God  the 
Father  before  all  worlds  [or  ages]  :  by  which  we  may 
be  sure  they  would  not  have  translated  TrpwToroKos 
7rdcrt]9  KTia-eu)?  as  our  English  does,  the  firstborn  of 
every  creature.,  (of  which  English  expression  the 
Arians  and  Socinians  take  advantage,)  but  '  born 
'  [or  begotten]  before  all  the  creation.' 

This,  some  learned  men*  do  think  was  the  very 
form  of  the  creed  that  had  been  used  time  out  of 
mind  at  Csesarea.  If  so,  then  this  is  the  oldest 
copy  extant  of  any  public  creed.  But  I  think 
Eusebius'  words  do  lead  one  to  conceive  that  this 
was  the  substance,  but  the  words  his  own :  because 
he  says,  '  they  accepted  of  my  words  with  some 
'  additions.' 
215.      At  the  time  when  Arius  first  moved  his  contro- 

^  Dr.  Cave,  Epist.    Apologetica,    [subjoined    to    his    Historia 
Litteraria.] 


Alexander's  Creed.  453 

versy,  Alexander  the  bishop  of  the  place  opposed  to  chap, 
his  novelty,  that  the   steady  faith  of  Christians  is, 


and  always  was,  thus^^ :  l^^^^^o^' 

*  We  believe  in  one  unbegotten  Father,  who  has  ^*^^^- 
'  no  cause  at  all  of  his  essence,  &c.     And  in  one 

*  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  the  only  begotten  Son  of  God  : 
'  begotten,  not  out  of  nothing,  but  of  the  Father. 
'  We  believe  him,  as  well  as  the  Father,  to  be  un- 
'  changeable  and  unalterable,  &c.  And  to  differ 
'  nothing  from  the  Father,  but  only  that  the  Father 

*  is  unbegotten,  &c.  That  the  Son  does  ever  exist 
'  from  the  Father.  He  took  a  body,  not  in  show 
'  only,  but  a  real  one,  of  the  holy  virgin.  In  the 
'  end  of  the  world  he  came  among  men  to  expiate 
'  their  sins  :  he  was  crucified,  and  died,  without  any 
'  diminution  of  his  divinity :  he  arose  from  the 
'  dead  :  he  ascended  into   heaven,  and  sits  at  the 

*  right  hand  of  the  majesty  of  God. 

'  Also  one  Holy  Spirit,  which  insj)ired  both  the 

*  holy  men  of  the  Old  Testament  and  the  Divine 
'  teachers  of  the  New.' 

'  Moreover  one  holy  catholic  and  apostolic  church: 
'  and  the  resurrection  of  the  dead.' 

This,  it  seems,  was  the  substance  of  what  the 
Christians  of  Alexandria  had  ever  held :  but  this 
could  not  be  the  very  form ;  because  it  is  (with  the 
clauses  that  I  have  left  out)  too  long  for  the  use  of 
baptism. 

Alius'  own  creed,  given  in  to  the  emperor,  was  228. 
this  ^  : 

*  We  believe  in  one  God,  the  Father  Almighty. 


»  Theodoret.  Hist.  Eccl.  lib.  i.  c.  4. 
*  Socrat.  Hist.  Eccles.  lib.  i.  cap.  26. 


454  Arms'  Creed. 

CHAP.  '  And  in  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  his  Son  :  begotten 
'of  him   before   all    worlds :    God   the  word  :    by 


jhe^^po-'*'^  '  whom  all  things  were  made,  both  things  in  heaven, 
sties.  t  ^^^  things  on  earth.  He  came  down,  and  was  in- 
'  carnated  :  he  suffered  and  rose  again,  and  ascended 
'  into  heaven :  and  will  come  again  to  judge  the 
'  living  and  the  dead.  And  in  the  Holy  Spirit.  And 
*  in  the  resurrection  of  the  flesh,  and  the  life  of  the 
'  world  to  come,  and  the  kingdom  of  heaven,  and 
'  one  catholic  church  of  God  from  one  end  of  the 
'  world  to  the  other.' 

And  he  subjoins  ;  that  since  he  had  this  faith,  he 
entreated  that  he  might  by  the  emperor's  means  be 
admitted   to  the  unity  of  the  church,  all  questions 
and    needless    disputes    being   laid    aside.     But  he 
conceals  here  his  worst  opinions,  viz.  that  there  was 
a  time  when  God  the  Son  was  not :  and  that  he 
was  made  out  of  nothing,  &c.,  and  was  not  very  or 
true  God. 
237-      Twelve  years  after  the  council  of  Nice,  Constan- 
tine   dying,  there   succeeded  in  the  East   for  forty 
years  together,  except  very  short  intervals,  emperors 
that  were  Arians.     During  which  time  the  Arians, 
bearing  the  greatest  sway  in  those  parts,  set  up  a 
great  many  new  forms  of  creeds  :  some  of  them  in 
words    tolerably    well    agreeing   with    the    catholic 
sense  ;   others,  very  disagreeable.     But  the  general 
answer  that  the  Christians  of  the  West,  (which  were 
free  from  the  Arian  persecution,)  and  the  catholic 
party  in  the   East,  gave,   when  any  of  these  were 
proposed   to  them  for  their  assent,  was;   that  the 
\  Nicene  Creed  was  enough,  and  they  would  not  en- 

tertain any  new  ones.     I  will  give  for  a  specimen 
one  of  the  best  and  one  of  the  worst  of  them. 


The  Greed  of  Arians.  455 

1.  The  council  of  Arians,  met  at  Antiocli  anno   chap. 
341,  agreed  upon  this  creed  >' ;  ^^- 


'  To  believe  in  one  God  of  all,  the  Creator  of  all  ^'^^''  after 
1  ■  ••11         1  •     •   1 1  ^'^^  ^p°" 

'  thmgs,  visible  and  invisible.     And  in  one  only  be- sties. 

*  gotten  Son  of  God,  who  before  all  worlds  [or  ages]   ^^^' 
'  subsisted  and  was  together  with  the  Father  that 

*  begot  him  ;  by  whom  all  things,  both  visible  and 

*  invisible,  were  made.  He  in  the  last  days  came 
'  down  by  the  good-will  of  the  Father,  and  took 
'  flesh  of  the  holy  Virgin  :  and  having  fulfilled  all 
'  the   Father's    counsel,    suffered :    and   was   raised 

*  again :    and  went  back  to  heaven,  and  sits  at  the 

*  right  hand  of  the  Father :  and  will  come  to  judge 
'  the  living  and  the  dead  :  and  continues  to  be  King 
'  and  God  for  ever.  We  believe  also  in  the  Holy 
'  Spirit.  And  if  we  need  say  any  more,  w^e  be- 
'  lieve  the  resurrection  of  the  flesh,  and  the  life 
'  everlasting.' 

And  three  years  after,  when  the  heresy  of  Pho-  244. 
tinus  had  in  the  mean  time  burst  out,  meeting  there 
again,  they  (to  give  as  good  satisfaction  as  they 
could  to  the  western  bishops)  declared  their  sense  of 
that  heresy,  and  of  the  exorbitance  of  some  Arians. 
After  the  body  of  their  creed,  much  like  the  former, 
they  add  such  clauses  as  these  ^ ;  '  All  that  say,  that 
'  the  Son  of  God  was   made  out  of  nothing,  or  of 

*  any  other  substance,  and  not  of  that  of  God ;  or, 
'  that  there  ever  was  a  time  or  age  in  which  he  was 
'  not :  such  men  the  holy  catholic  church  renounces.' 
They  prove  it  to  be  both  impious  and  absurd,  '  to 

*  imagine  any  time  before  he  was  begotten ;   since 

*  all  time  and  all  ages  were  made  by  him.'     They 

>■  Socrat.  lib.  ii.  cap.  10.  »  Socrat.  lib.  ii.  cap.  ig. 


456  The  Creed  of  Avians. 

CHAP,  declare  that  *  neither  when  they  profess  three  per- 

'  sons,  rp'ia  Wpoa-wTra,  they  do  make  three  Gods :  nor 

Sripo^^'''^  '  when  they  say,  there  is  one  God  the  Father  of  our 
sties.  i  Lord  Jesus  Christ  the  only  unbegotten,  do  they  there- 

*  fore  deny  Christ  to  be  Qeov  Trpoaiwviov,  the  eternal 
'  God  [or  God  before  all  ages].^  They  do  also  own 
there,  that  he  is  '  God  by  nature,  perfect  and  true 
'  God.'  They  profess  '  their  abhorrence  of  Photinus, 
'  who  makes  the  word  to  be  avvirapKrov,  without  a 
'  personal  subsistence.'  And  say,  '  As  for  ourselves, 
'  we  know  him  to  be  not  merely  as  a  word  spoken, 
'  or  as  reason  in  God :  but  God  the  word,  and  sub- 
'  sisting  by  himself,  and  the  Son  of  God  and  Christ. 
'  And  that  he  was  with  his  Father  before  the  world, 
'  not  by  way  of  prescience,  &c.,  but  the  subsisting 
'  WORD  of  the  Father,  and  God  of  God like  to 

*  the  Father  in  all  things,  &c.  Moreover,'  say  they, 
'  we,  understanding  in  a  cautious  sense  that  which 

*  is  said  of  him.  The  Lord  possessed  me  in  the  be- 
'  gi7ining  of  his  umy^,  [this  text  the  Greek  transla- 
'  tors  had  rendered,  Kvpio^  eKTiae  fie,  The  Lord  built 
'  or  made  »^e,]  do  by  no  means  understand,  that  he 
'  was  begotten  in  a  way  like  to  the  creatures  made 
'  by  him  :  for  it  were  impious,  and  against  the  faith 
'  of  the  church,  to  liken  the  Creator  to  the  things 

'  by  him  made,  &c. Thus  we   believe   in  the 

'  perfect  and  most  holy  Trinity,  calling  the  Father, 
'  God  ;  and  the  Son,  God  ;  we  do  not  mean  these  to 
'  be  two,  but  one  God,'  &c.  These  men  were  not 
very  far  from  the  catholic  faith. 

2.  But  about  sixteen  years  afterward,  this  sect 
carried  matters  to  more  extravagant  outrages.  For 
the    emperor   Constantius,   a    bigoted   Arian,   being 


^  Prov.  viii.  22. 


The  Creed  of  the  Eunomicms.  457 

then  at  Antioch,  a  party  met  there,  and  determined  chap. 

IX 

that  '  the  Son  is  not  at  all  like  the  Father,  neither         ' 


'  in  essence  nor  in  will :  that  he  was  made  out  of  },^^'"  ^^^^^' 

the  apo- 

'  nothing  :  as  Arius  had  at  first  said.'  sties. 

Sozomen  relating  this  ^,  says,  that  there  were 
among  these  (who  were  but  few  in  all)  several  of  the 
party  of  Aetius,  who,  he  says,  '  was  the  first  that 
'  after  Arius  ventured  to  use  openly  such  expres- 
'  sions,  and  was  therefore  called  the  atheist'  And 
about  this  time  Eunomius,  the  partner  of  Aetius, 
published  his  creed  to  this  purpose. 

'  There  is  one  God,  unbegotten  and  without  be- 
'  ginning,  &c.,  the  Maker  and  Creator  of  all  things, 
'  and  first  of  his  only  begotten  Son,  8cc.  For  he 
'  begot,  created,  and  made  his  Son  before  all  things, 

*  and  before  all  the  creation,  only  by  his  jjower  and 

*  operation :  not  communicating  any  thing  of  his 
'  own  essence  to  him,  &c.,  nor  making  him  another 
'  like  himself,  &c.,  but  he  begot  him  of  such  a  nature 
'  as  he  thought  fit,  &c.  And  by  him  he  made,  first 
'  and  the  greatest  of  all,  the  Holy  Spirit,  &c.  And 
'  after  him,  all  the  things  in  heaven  and  earth,  &c. 
'  There  is  also  one  Holy  Spirit,  the  first  and  greatest 

*  of  the  works  of  the  only-begotten,  made  by  the 
'  command  of  the  Father,  but  by  the  power  and 
'  operation  of  the  Son.' 

This  man  had  reason  to  appoint  among  his  fol- 
lowers a  new  form  of  baptism :  for  the  old  one  did 
not  fit  to  such  opinions.  So  he  laid  it  aside,  and 
used  that  impious  form  of  baptizing  which  I  men- 
tioned before  at  §.  4.  '  In  the  name  of  the  unbe- 
'  gotten  Father,'  &c. 

The  moderate  and  general  sort  of  Arians  did  all 
b  Hist.  Eccl.  lib.  ii.  cap.  29. 


458  The  Belief  of  Photinus. 

CHAP,  the  while  own  all  that  the  Nicene  Creed  had  said  of 

IX. 

our  Saviour  to  be  true,  save  that  they  thought  not 


riirapo^'^^'^  fit  to  determine  that  he  is  '  of  one  substance  with 
sties.  <  i\^Q  Father:'  as  neither,  on  the  contrary,  did  they 
think  fit  to  say,  as  Arius  had  done,  that  he  was 
'  created,'  or  was  '  of  any  other'  substance.  They 
rejected  both  those  clauses,  and  said  that  the  sub- 
stance or  essence  of  God  is  unsearchable,  and  no- 
thing ought  to  be  determined  about  it.     Yet  Euse- 

225-  bins  ^  and  Athanasius  ^  shewed  them  that  that  very 
word  had  been  often  used  by  the  Christians  both  of 
the  Greek  and  Latin  church,  above  a  hundred  years 
before.  Many  of  the  books  out  of  which  they  could 
then  prove  this,  are  now  lost :  yet  for  the  Latins, 

100.  Tertullian  does  use  that  very  expression  in  the  pas- 
sage of  his  that  I  quoted  last.  And  Pamphilus  the 
martyr,  in  his  Apology  for  Origen,  (or  be  it  Euse- 
bius  himself  that  was  the  author  of  that  piece,) 
makes  it  plain  that  it  was  a  common  expression  in 

iio.  the  books  of  Origen  that  were  then  extant.  Yet  if 
any  in  those  times  did  scruple  the  use  of  the  word 
6iJ.oovcTLo^,  as  being  not  a  Scripture  word ;  but  did  by 
other  words  shew  their  belief  in  Father,  Son,  and 
Holy  Spirit,  one  God,  to  be  catholic  ;  Athanasius 
owns  such  men  for  brethren  ;  and  says,  it  was  the 
case  of  Basil  of  Ancyra.  De  Synodis  Arimin.  et 
Seleuc.  71071  longe  a  fine  ^. 

However,  we  see  that  this  sect  of  the  Arians, 
even  the  dregs  of  it  among  the  Eunomians,  had  not 
nigh  so  derogatory  thoughts  of  the  nature   of  our 

^  Euseb.  Epist.  apud  Socrat.  lib.  i.  c.  8. 
c  Epist.  ad  Afros,  apud  Theodoret.  lib.  i.  c.  8. 
d  [See  section  41   of  that  treatise,  in  the  Benedictine  edition 
of  Athanasius,  torn.  i.  p.  755.] 


Tli6  Belief  of  Photinus.  459 

blessed  Saviour,  as  our  Socinians  have;  who   take  chap. 
him  to  be   a  mere  man,  and  to  have  had  no  being  — ^-1_ 
before   his  human   birth.     Photinus    indeed    did  iutlrao^^^'' 
those  confused  times  broach  that  opinion  wliich  one  '''*'^- 
sort   of  the   Socinians   do  now  fall   into  ;    that    the  241. 
Word,  the  A 0709,  of  which  St.  John  speaks,  is  eter- 
nal :  but  that  this  Word  is  not  a  person,  nor  did 
take  man's  nature  in  Jesus  Christ,  was  not  made 
flesh,  (as  St.  John  says  he  was,)   but  only  inspired, 
directed,  or  dwelled  in,  the  man  Jesus.     But  he  did 
no  sooner  say  this,  but  that  all  sorts  of  Christians, 
Catholics,  Arians,  and  Eunomians,  joined  in  an  abhor- 
rence  of  him,  as  bishop  Pearson  shews    at  large «, 
by  reciting  the  condemnations  of  him  particularly. 
And  he  concludes  ;  '  so  suddenly  was  this  opinion 
'  rejected  by  all  Christians,  applauded  by  none  but 

*  Julian  the  heretic,  [lege  apostate,]  who  railed  at  261. 

*  St.  John  for  making  Christ  God,  and  commended 
'  Photinus  for  denying  it :   as  appears  by  an  epistle 

*  written  by  Julian   to   him,  as   it   is,   though  in  a 

*  mean  translation,  delivered  by  Facundus  ad  Jus- 
'  tinian.  lib.  iv.  "  Tu  quidem  0  Photine;'  &c.  You 
'  Photinus,  say  something  like,  and  come  near  to 
'  good  sense.  You  do  Mell  not  to  bring  him,  whom 
'  you  think  to  be  God,  into  a  woman's  womb.' 

And  from  that  time  till  very  lately,  whoever 
embraced  that  opinion  has  thought  fit  at  the  same 
time  to  renounce  the  Scriptures,  and  the  name  of  a 
Christian. 

What  creed  the  Arians  used  all  this  while,  for 
their  candidates  to  make  their  professions  by  at 
baptism,    I    know    not;  for   their    creeds    that    are 

e  On  the  Creed,  page  120.  [in  the  folio  editions,  1676  and 
1723.  Article  II.  '  his  only  Son.'] 


460  The  Greeks  haptize  hy  the  Nicene  Creed. 

CHAP,  upon  record  they  altered   almost  every  day.     The 

TV 

'      Catholics  in  the  East  made  use  of  the  Nicene,  as 


Year  after  appears    by    Epipha7iius    in    Ancorato^,    where    he 
sties.         gives  directions  that  '  every  one  of  the  catechumens 

*  that  would  come  to  the  holy  laver  must  not  only 

*  profess  in  general  to  believe,  but  must  be  taught 
'  to   say  expressly,   as  their  and  our  mother  does, 

*  viz.  "  We  believe  in  one  God," '  &c.,  as  it  is  in  the 
Nicene  Creed.  Only  in  Epiphanius'  copy  some 
clauses  are   put   in  by  a  later  hand   (or  by  himself 

281.  afterward)  out  of  the  Constantinopolitan  Creed, 
which  was  set  forth  four  years  after  the  first  writ- 
ing of  that  book.     He  dates  his  book  the  tenth  year 

^77-  of  Valens,  and  he  says,  '  This  is  the  faith  delivered 
'  by  all  the  holy  bishops  together,  above  three  hun- 
'  dred  and  ten  in  number.'  Which  must  be  the 
Nicene  bishops.  So  that  it  is  certain  he  in  the  first 
edition  of  his  book  set  down  the  Nicene :  and  it 
was  interpolated  afterwards  with  those  few  addi- 
tions which  the  council  of  Constantinople  made  to 
it.  And  I  indeed  was  of  opinion  that  the  same 
thing   had    happened  to  the   Jerusalem  Creed,   ex- 

259-  plained  in  way  of  catechism  by  St.  Cyril.  He  wrote 
those  catechisms  first  in  Constantius'  time;  and  yet 
there  are  in  them,  as  they  are  now,  the  very  clauses 

281.  of  the  Constantinopolitan  Creed.  This,  I  reckoned, 
could  never  have  happened  so  exact,  but  that  he  in 
his  old  age,  (for  he  lived  to  that  time,)  or  somebody 
after  him,  had  added  those  clauses  which  the  coun- 
cil of  Constantino})le  had  j)iit  in.  But  I  find  that 
Mr.  Grabe  ^  is  of  another  opinion,  and  thinks  that 

•^  [Sect.  119.  See  Epiphanii  Opera,   I'etavii.   fol.  Paris.    1622. 
torn.  ii.  p.  I  22.] 

«  Annot.  in  Opera  Doct.  Bull.  [See  '  G.  BuUi  Judicium  Eccle- 


The  Greeks  baptize  by  the  Nicene  Creed.  461 

the    Jerusalem    Creed,    and    several    other   ancient  on  a  p. 
eastern  creeds,  had  those  clauses  before  the  time  of 


the   Constantinopolitan    council.     To    whose    great  tiie'^aiTo-^' 
learning  I  willingly  subscribe.  *'''^^- 

There  is  from  this  time  forward  abundant  evi- 
dence that  the  eastern  churches  generally  made  use 
of  the  Nicene  Creed  to  be  repeated  at  baptisms. 
The  council  of  Ephesus^'  orders  '  that  none  do  write  33'- 
'  or  propose  any  other  faith  [or  creed]  but  that 
'  which  was  agreed  on  by  the  holy  Fathers  assem- 

*  bled  at  Nice,  &c. — And  if  any  one  do  offer  or  pro- 

*  pose  any  other  to  such  as  desire  to  be  converted 
'  to  the  knowledge  of  the  truth,  [i.  c.  to  such  as 
'  come  to  be  baptized,]    either  from  the  heathens, 

*  or  from  the  Jews,  or  from  any  heresy ;  if  they  be 
'  bishops  or  clergymen,  they  shall  be  deposed ;  if 
'  laymen,  excommunicated.'  The  council  of  Chalce- 
don  confirms  the  same  '.  And  so  does  the  edict  of 
Justinian.  And  several  other  synods  do  mention  351- 
it  as  the  faith  '  into  which   they  were  baptized,  and 

'  into  which  they  do  baptize.'    Basiliscus,  the  usurper  43°. 
of  the  Greek  empire,  having  in  his  edict  mentioned 
this  creed,  adds,  '  into  which   both  we  and  all  our 

*  ancestors    that    were    Christians   have   been   bap- 

*  tized  •"'.'     And  the  emperor  Zeno  enacts '  that  all  376. 
baptisms  should  be  by  that. 

This  shews  that  what  I  quoted  before  "^  out  of 
Gregory  Nazianzen  (that  he  would  not  baptize  any 
Arian)  was  not  singular  in  him  :  since  the  church 
in  all  those  parts  used   at  baptism  that  creed  which 

'  sicE  Catholicse,'  &c.  cap.  vi.  sect.  6,  7,  &c.  p.  49.  and  Grabe's 
Annotations,  ibid.  p.  65.  edit.  fol.  Lond.  1703.] 

t  Act.  6.         »  Evagrius,  Hist.  Eccles.  lib.  ii.  c.  4. 

k  Evagrius,  lib.  iii.  c.  4.     •  Ibid.  cap.  14.     ™  Pt.  i.  ch.  i  i.  §.  8. 


462  The  Constantinopolitan  Creed. 

CHAP,  has  the  expressions  purposely  levelled  against  that 

' heresy. 

Xe^a  0^^^"  -^11-  Valens,  the  great  persecutor  of  the  Nicene 
sties.  faith,  died  in  the  fourteenth  year  of  his  reign.  And 
then  the  church  had  liberty  once  again  to  come  to- 
gether from  all  parts  both  of  the  East  and  West : 
281,  which  they  did  at  Constantinople,  anno  381.  They 
made  no  doubt  or  delay  of  establishing  the  Nicene 
Creed,  in  opposition  to  all  the  novelties  that  had  dis- 
turbed the  vrorld  since  it.  Only  inasmuch  as  some 
new  heresies  had  sprung  up  since,  especially  about 
our  belief  in  the  Holy  Spirit,  they  put  in  a  few 
clauses  against  them.  Eunomius,  Macedonius,  and 
some  others,  had  followed  Arius'  pattern  of  inno- 
vating, so  far,  that  as  he  had  made  the  Son  of  God 
a  creature,  so  they  would  do  the  same  by  the  Spirit 
of  God.  Arius  had  had  a  much  better  handle  to 
take  hold  of:  for  the  Son  did  indeed  take  on  him  a 
created  nature  :  and  because  in  that  nature  he  was 
born,  died,  &c.,  there  were  a  great  many  plausible 
things  to  say  among  vulgar  people.  But  to  make 
the  Spirit  of  God,  which  St.  Paul  shews  to  be  in- 
M^ard  to  God,  as  the  spirit  of  a  man  is  to  a  man, 
saying,  1  Cor.  ii.  11,  What  man  hioweth  the  things 
of  a  man,  save  the  spirit  of  man  ivhich  is  in  him  f 
even  so  the  things  of  God  knoweth  no  man,  but  the 
Sph'it  of  God.  To  make  him  a  creature  too,  was, 
we  should  think,  a  bold  attempt,  not  only  on  the 
honour  of  God,  but  also  on  the  reason  and  sense  of 
men.  But  so  it  always  happens.  Whenever  one 
sort  of  innovators  break  in  upon  any  article  of  faith, 
there  always  arises  behind  their  backs  a  new  sect, 
that  will  refine  upon  the  first,  and  carry  the  super- 
structure further   than  they  ever  intended,  and  to 


The  ConstantinopoUtan  Creed.  463 

such   extravagancies   as   the   principal   heretics  are  chap. 
ashamed  of.      Yet  some  of  the  Arians,  that  the  party      ^^' 
might  be  the   stronger  against  the  catholics,  struck  X^'"'"''^*^'' 
m  with  the  Macedonians  in  this  too.  sties. 

The  bishops  of  this  council  added  therefore,  as  I 
said,  some  new  clauses,  relating  to  our  belief  con- 
cerning   the    Holy   Spirit,    and    some    other    plain 
things  to  the  body  of  the  Nicene.     And  the  creed 
by  them  published  is  oftener  called  by  the  name  of 
the  Nicene  Creed,  than  of  the  Constantinopolitan : 
and  so  they  themselves   desired  it  should  ;  it  being 
only  a  second  edition  of  the   Nicene  with  those  ad- 
ditions.    Nestorius,  in  his  sermons  preached  at  Con-   328. 
stantinople  about   forty  years  after  this  time,  does 
often  quote  the  Nicene  Creed  in  defence  of  his  opin- 
ion :  but  the  clauses  he  produces   are  the  words  of 
this.     And  generally  after  this  time,  when  we  have 
mention  of  the  Nicene  Creed,  or  faith,  we  are  to  un- 
derstand  this,  unless    where    the   author    does    ex- 
pressly make  a  distinction. 

It  is  the  same  (except  one  word)  that  is  nowadays 
repeated  in  the  Communion  Service  by  almost  all 
the  established  churches  of  Christians  in  the  world. 
So  general  an  affront  does  that  extravagant  author 
give,  that  says,  'All  that  own  it  must  renounce 
*  the  numerical  unity  of  God's  essence  •".'  The  copy 
of  it,  with  a  distinction  of  such  clauses  as  were  then 
added,  is  this  : 

'  We  believe  in   one   God,  the  Father  Almighty,  281. 
'  maker    of  heaven    and   earth,    and   of   all    things 
■'  visible  and  invisible. 

'  And  in  one  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  the  only  begotten 

°i  [See  above,  chapter  v,  sect.  9.  page  150.] 


464  The  Constantinopolitan  Creed. 

CHAP.  '  Son  of  God :    begotten   of  his  Father   before    alt 

__!__  '  worlds  :  God  of  God  :  light  of  light :  very  God  of 

Year  after  «  ^gj.^  Q^^  .  begottoii,  iiot  made :  being  of  one  sub- 

st'es-         '  stance  with  the  Father  :  by  whom  all  things  were 

'  made ;  [in  some  copies  it  is  added,  both  things  in 

530-  '  heaven  and  things  in  earth ;]  who  for  us  men  and 

'  for  our  salvation  came  d.ownfrom  heaven,  and  was 

'  incarnate  by  the  Holy  Spirit  of  the  Virgin  Mary, 

'  and  was  made  man,  and  was  crucified  also  for  us 

*  under  Pontius  Pilate.  He  suffered  ;  and  was 
'  buried ;  and  the  third  day  he  rose  again  according 
'  to  the  Scriptures,  and  ascended  into  heaven,  and 
'  sitteth  at  the   right  hand  of  the  Father ;   and  he 

*  shall  come  again  to  judge  the  living  and  the  dead ; 

*  whose  kingdom  shall  have  no  end. 

*  And  we  believe  in  the  Holy  Spirit,  the  Lord 
'  and  giver  of  life :  who  proceedeth  from  the  Fa- 
'  ther :  ivho  with  the  Father  and  the  Son  together 
'  is  worshipped  and  glorified:  who  spake  by  the 
'  prophets. 

'  And  we  believe  one  catholic  and  apostolic 
'  church.  We  acknowledge  one  baptism  for  the 
*■  remission  of  sins.     And  we  look  for  the  resurrec- 

*  tion  of  the  dead ;  a?id  the  life  of  the  world  to 
'  come.^ 

Whereas  in  the  copies  nowadays  used  in  the 
western  church  it  is  said,  '  The  Holy  Spirit,  he, 
'  who  proceedeth  from  the  Father  and  the  Son :' 
those  words,  and  the  Son,  were  added,  several  hun- 
dred years  after  the  making  of  the  creed,  by  the 
church  of  Rome ;  and  so  passed  into  all  the  western 
copies :  but  the  eastern  churches  have  them  not. 
And  how  true  soever  the  doctrine  may  be,  it  was 
not  fair  for  any  one  part  of  the   church  to  add  the 


The  Co7istantmopolitan  Creed.  465 

words  to  the  old  copy.     The  Greeks  say,  he  proceeds  chap. 
from  the  Father  by  the  Son. 


The  chief  thing  that  this  creed  has  more  than  ^^^^^^ ''J'^^'' 
the  old  Nicene,  is,  that  the  Holy  Spirit  is  '  Lord,  ^ties. 
'  and  giver  of  life.'  The  Macedonian  heretics  had 
taught  that  the  Holy  Spirit  is  one  of  the  minister- 
ing spirits  mentioned,  Heb.  i.  14,  only  greater  than 
the  rest.  It  was  in  ojiposition  to  this,  that  the  ca- 
tholics testified  their  faith,  that  he  is  (not  a  minis- 
tering or  serving  spirit,  as  the  angels  that  are  crea- 
tures, but)  TO  KvpLov  Tlvevixa,  '  the  Spirit  that  is  the 
'  Lord :'  referring  to  2  Cor.  iii.  17-  where  St.  Paul 
having  at  ver.  8.  called  the  gospel  the  ministration 
of  the  Spirit,  (because  in  it  the  power  and  grace  of 
the  Holy  Spirit  is  especially  manifested,)  and  having 
in  prosecution  of  that  discourse  spoken  to  this  pur- 
pose :  that  as  Moses,  when  he  turned  his  face  to  the 
people,  put  on  a  veil ;  so  the  Jews  reading  the  law 
had  still  a  veil  over  their  understandings  :  but  as 
Moses,  when  he  turned  to  the  Lord  put  off  his 
veil :  so,  when  it  [the  heart  of  the  people]  shall 
turn  to  the  Lord,  the  veil  shall  be  taken  aiimy. 
Now,  says  he,  o  KJpiOf  to  Wv&jfxa  ea-n,  *  the  Spirit  is 
*  the  Lord,'  (which  our  English  has,  the  Lord  is 
that  Spirit,)  and  ichere  the  Spirit  of  the  Lord  is, 
there  is  Trapprjcrca  Ubertij  [or  an  open  face  without  a 
veil].  And  for  the  other  phrase,  Xwottoiovv,  a  quick- 
ener  [or  giver  of  life],  it  is  an  attribute  of  the  Spirit, 
often  mentioned  in  Scri])ture. 

The  council  of  Constantinople  was  not  the  first 
that  condemned  the  Macedonian  heresy.  The  catho- 
lics had  done  it  before,  from  the  time  of  the  rise 
of  it,  in  several  particular  councils,  as  they  had  op- 
portunities in  those  times  of  persecution  to  assemble 

WALL,  VOL.  II.  H  h 


466  The  Roman  Creed. 

CHAP,  together.     As  in  that  of  Alexandria,  mentioned  by 

IX 

'      Socrates,  lib.  iii.  cap.  7.     And    the    Illyrican,    men- 
Year  after  ^ioned    by   Tlieodoret,  lib.  iv.  cap.  8.     And    one    at 

the  apo-  •  ^ 

sties.  Rome  under    Damasus,    mentioned    by    Tlieodoret, 

262. 
267.  lib.  ii.  cap.  22.     And  one   at    Antioch,    recited    by 

278!Holsteniiis",   Collect.   Rom.  p.  166.       But    this    at 
^^'Constantinople  was  the  first   general    council  that 
met  after  the  rise  of  this  heresy. 

Whether  the  Greek  church  did  after  these  times 
in  their  office  of  baptism  make  use  of  this  Constan- 
tinopolitan  copy  of  the  creed,  instead  of  the  Nicene 
properly  called  ;  or  whether  they  still  use  the  old 
one,  I  know  not.  But  it  seems  that  in  the  year 
476,  they  kept  the  old  copy ;  because  Basiliscus,  in 
the  edict  I  cited,  after  having  declared  that  he  will 
maintain  the  Nicene  faith,  '  into  which  he  and  all 
'  his  predecessors  were  baptized,'  adds ;  '  and  all 
'  things  that  were  enacted  in  confirmation  of  that 
'  holy  creed  in  this  royal  city  by  the  one  hundred 
'  and  fifty  Fathers,  against  those  that  spoke  ill  of  the 
*  Holy  Spirit.'  This  was  the  Constantinopolitan. 
Therefore  what  he  said  before  must  be  understood 
of  the  Nicene  properly  so  called. 

XIII.  It  is  wonder  that  during  all  the  contest 
about  creeds  that  was  in  those  fifty  years  of  the 
Arian  times,  we  hear  nothing  said  of  the  creed  used 
in  the  church  of  Rome  :  especially  if  they  had  at 
that  time  procured  their  creed  to  be  called  the  Apo- 
stolic Creed,  or  the  Apostles' Creed,  (as  they  afterwards 
did,)  it  could  not  have  failed  but  that  both  the  par- 
ties would  have  referred  themselves  to  that.  But, 
on  the  contrary,  there  is  not  a  word  said  of  it.     Nor 

n  [See  '  L.  Holstenii  Collectio  Romana  Veterum  Hist.  Eccles. 
'  Monumentorum,'  8vo.  Romse,  1662.] 


The  Roman  Greed.  467 

can  it  be  known  what  form  of  a  creed  they  used  in  chap. 
those   times.     They  all   along   received   and  owned       ^^' 


the  Nicene  Creed,  and  renounced  all  that  would  not  ^  *"''*'■  ^*^^'^'' 

the  apo- 

own  it :  but  they  do  not  seem  to  have  applied  that  sties. 
to  their  ordinary  offices  of  baptism  ;  for  that  use, 
once  begun,  would  not  have  been  left  off  again :  but 
to  have  had  a  form  of  their  own,  as  other  churches 
had,  before  the  Nicene,  and  to  have  added  to  it  from 
time  to  time  such  clauses  as  appeared  most  neces- 
sary against  any  heresies  that  arose.  But  still  it  is 
a  wonder  how  they,  and  the  other  western  churches, 
could  reconcile  their  practice  (in  baptizing  by  any 
other  creed  than  the  Nicene)  with  those  canons  of 
the  councils  of  Ephesus  and  Chalcedon,  which  as  I 
shewed  ^  did  so  positively  enjoin,  that  no  other 
should  be  used  for  that  purpose  from  that  time  for- 
ward. For  these  councils,  being  general  ones,  must 
have  been  ratified  by  themselves  as  well  as  by  the 
eastern  bishops :  and  their  popes  do  to  this  day 
swear  that  they  will  own  and  adhere  to  them. 

About  the  year  400,  we  have  some  light  given  300. 
us  how  the  words  of  the  ordinary  creed  in  the 
church  of  Rome  stood  at  that  time  :  but  not  by  any 
writer  of  that  church,  which  had  but  few  ;  but  by 
one  whom  they  do  not  love.  Rufinus,  a  presbyter 
of  the  church  of  Aquileia,  a  city  in  Italy,  wrote  a 
comment  on  the  creed p  as  it  Mas  worded  in  his 
church  :  and  he  notes  by  the  way  some  of  the  dif- 
ferences or  agreements  which  their  church  had  with 
the  church   of  Rome  and   the  eastern  churches  in 

o  Sect.  1 2, 

P  [This  was  first  printed  at  Oxford  in  146S  or  1478  ;  and  is 
subjoined  to  Goulartus'  edition  of  St.  Cyprian,  and  subsequently 
to  that  published  by  bishop  Fell,  folio,  Oxford,  16^2.] 

H  h  2 


468  Chrisfs  Descent  into  Hades. 

CHAP,  wording  the  several  clauses.     And  by  his  account 
'. the   Roman   Creed   at   tliat  time   must   have  stood 


Year  after    +},„«,. 
the  apo-        ^""^  • 

sties.  i  I  believe  in  God  the  Father  Almighty.     And  in 

'  Jesus  Christ  his  only  Son,  our  Lord  :  who  was 
'  conceived  by  the  Holy  Spirit,  of  the  Virgin  Mary  : 
'  crucified  under  Pontius  Pilate  :  and  buried.  The 
'  third  day  he  rose  again  from  the  dead :  he  as- 
'  cended  into  heaven :  sitteth  at  the  right  hand  of 
'  the  Father :  from  thence  he  shall  come  to  judge 
'  the  quick  and  the  dead.  And  in  the  Holy  Spirit. 
*  The  holy  church.     The  forgiveness  of  sins.    The 

*  resurrection  of  the  flesh.' 

The  clause,  '  Maker  of  heaven  and  earth,'  was 
afterward  added  out  of  the  Constantinopolitan  or 
other  eastern  creeds. 

'  The  descent  of  Christ  into  hades'  (or  hell,  as  we 
style  it  in  English)  was  not  as  yet  in  the  Roman 
Creed,  but  was  put  in  afterward.  It  is  expressed 
in  the  oldest  rule  or  breviate  of  faith  that  is  in  the 
world,  if  there  be  any  credit  to  be  given  to  those 
records  of  the  church  of  Edessa,  copied  out  of  the 
Syriac  by  Eusebius^,  and  translated  by  him  :  where 
it  is  said  that  Thaddseus,  one  of  the  Seventy,  being 
sent  by  Thomas  the  apostle  to  cure  Abgarus  the 
king,  and  to  convert  his  people,  preached  to  them, 
'  How  Christ  came  from  the  Father;  and  of  the 
'  power  of  his  works,  &c. ;  and  of  the  meanness  and 
'  lowliness  of  his  outward  appearance,  &c. ;  and  how 
'  he  died,  and  lowered  his  divinity :  how  many 
'  things  he  suffered  of  the  Jews :  and  how  he  was 
'  crucified  ;  koI  Kare^rj  e/?  rov  "AiSt]i>,  and  descended 

*  into  hades.     And  how  he  sits  now  on  the  right 

'1  Hist.  Eccles.  lib.  i.  cap.  ult.  [pag.  41.  ed.  Reading.] 


Chris fs  Descent  into  Hades.  469 

'  hand  of  God,  &c. ;  and  how  he  mIII  come  to  judge  chap. 
'  the  living  and  the  dead.'  __11__ 

These  thing's   were    done,  as   it    is   said    in    that  Y^*''  ^*^'^^ 

°  the  apo- 

register,  the   forty-third   year:    or,  as    other   copies '^ties. 
have  it,  the  three  hundred  and  fortieth  year :  which 
last,  viz.  the  three  hundred  and  fortieth  year  of  the 
computation  of  years  used  at  Edessa,  is  the  same 
year*"  on  which  our  Saviour  ascended  into  heaven. 

But    suppose    these    records    to    be   forged,    yet  200. 
they  must  have  been  a  good  while  before  Eusebius' 
time. 

Excepting   this  register,   the  eldest    creeds    that 
have    this    clause    are    the    Arian    ones ;    viz.    that 
drawn  up  at  Sirmium,  and  rehearsed  at  the  council  259- 
of  Ariminum,  mentioned  by  Socrates,  lib.  ii.  cap.  37. 
That  at  Nice  in  Thracia,  recited  by  Theodoret,  lib.  259. 
ii.  cap.  21.     And    that  at   Constantinople,   brought  260. 
into   use   by  Acacius  and   his   party,   reported  by 
Socrates,  lib.  ii.  cap.  41. 

Rufinus  says^,  it  was  in  his  time  in  the  Creed  of  300. 
Aquileia,  but  not  in  the  Oriental  Creed,  nor  in  that 
of  Rome  :  into  which  last  it  seems  to  have  been  in- 
serted about  the  year  600  ;  taken  perhaps  out  of  500. 
the  Creed  called  Athanasius',  which  about  that  time 
is  pretended  to  have  been  found  in  some  archives  at 
Rome,  having  never  been  heard  of  before. 

As  for  the  thing  itself,  of  Christ's  descent  into 
hades  ;  though  it  were  not  put  into  the  ancient 
creeds,  yet  it  was  ever  believed  by  all  Christians  : 
nor  could  it  be  otherwise ;  since  they  used  that 
phrase  in  the  case  of  any  man  that  died.  And  so 
does  the  Scripture  speak  of  any  man  that  dies,  be 

>■  See  the  note  of  Valesius  on  the  above  passage  of  Eusebius. 
s  In  Symbol,  [p.  17.  edit.  fol.  Oxon.  1682.] 


470  Roman  Creed,  called  the  Apostles'  Creed. 

CHAP,   he  good   or  bad,  as   going  to  sheol,  (which    is   the 
Hebrew  word,)  or  hades  (which  is  the  Greek  for  it). 


Srapo'?'"  Jacob,  Gen.  xliv.  29.  David,  Psahn  vi.  5.  the  wicked, 
sties.  Psalm  ix.  10.  all  go  to  hades.     To  go  down  to  hades^ 

or  ad  inferos,  was,  in  their  way  of  speaking,  no 
more  than  '  to  go  down  to  the  dead.''  And  if  we 
believe  that  Christ  rose  the  third  day  airo  roav  veKpcov, 
a  mortuis,  '  from  the  dead  ;'  we  nmst  believe  that 
three  days  before,  he  '  descended  to  the  dead.' 

The  clause,  '  everlasting  life,'  is  commonly  judged 
not  to  have  been  in  the  old  Roman  Creed.  For 
Rufinus  mentions  it  not  in  the  Aquileian  :  and  he 
notes  no  difference  between  that  and  the  Roman  in 
this  jDarticnlar.  And  yet  there  is  another  reason  on 
the  contrary,  to  think  that  it  was  expressed  there  ; 
because  Marcellus,  who  had  made  one  at  the  council 
of  Nice,  having  several  enemies  of  the  Arian  party 
in  the  East  that  accused  him  of  Sabellianism,  by 
mistake  of  his  meaning,  as  he  pretended,  appealed 
to  Julius  bishop  of  Rome  and  to  that  church,  as  to 
umpires  of  the  quarrel :  and  when  his  adversaries 
would  not  agree  to  refer  it  to  that  bishop,  nor  would 
come  thither,  he  left  there  a  draught  of  his  belief 
for  his  perpetual  vindication.  Which  draught  is  set 
^74- down  by  Epiphanius*,  and  is  exactly  the  same  with 
the  copy  of  the  Roman  Creed,  given  before  out  of 
300-  Rufinus,  save  that  it  adds  this  clause  at  last,  '  the 
*  life  everlasting.'  And  except  this  draught,  there 
is  no  other  in  antiquity  that  does  very  near  resemble 
the  Roman  Creed.  So  that  it  is  probable  he  took 
the  Roman  Creed  itself  for  his  draught :  as  thinking 
that  he  could  not  better  approve  his  faith  to  the 
church  of  Rome,  than  by  expressing  it  in  the  words 
t  Hseres.  72.  [sect.  iii.  Op.  torn.  i.  p.  836.] 


Roman  Creed,  called  the  Apostles'  Creed.  471 

of  their  ordinary  creed.     And   it   is   possible    that  chap. 
Rufinus  might  omit  the  collating  the  Roman  Creed      ^^' 
with  the  Aquileian  in  this  point.     If  this  conjecture  Jj^^'g  ""J*^'" 
be  right,  this  is  the  eldest  copy  of  the  Roman  Creed  '^'''^• 
by  sixty  years ;    for  this   transaction   was    so   long  mo. 
before  the  time  that  Rufinus  wrote.     And  not  Iono-^°°' 
after  Rufinus'  time,  this  clause  appears  in  all  the 
copies. 

But,  however  it  were  with  the  Roman  Creed,  I 
shewed  before"  out  of  St.  Cyprian,  that  this  clause 
was  in  that  of  Carthage  long  before.  And  it  was  in 
several  eastern  ones.  Bishop  Pearson  thinks '^  it 
was  not  in  the  creed  used  for  baptism  at  Antioch  in 
St.  Chrysostom's  time,  and  he  takes  the  ground  of 
that  opinion  from  St.  Chrysostom's  Homil.  40.  in 
1  Epist.  ad  Corinth.  But  though  he  be  the  most 
exact  man  that  ever  wrote,  yet  he  is  mistaken  in  that. 
St.  Chrysostom  is  there  explaining  that  difficult 
place,  1  Cor.xv.  29,  of  some  men's  being  baptized  for 
the  dead.  He  thinks  for  the  dead  is  as  much  as 
to  say  for  their  bodies,  i.  e.  for  the  resurrection  of 
them,  or,  in  hopes  of  it.     '  For,'  says  he,  *  after  all 

*  the  rest,  we  add  that  which  St.  Paul  here  speaks 

*  of.     After    the    repeating    those    holy  words,  &c. 

*  (meaning  the  creed,)  we  say  this  at  the  last  of  all, 

*  when  we  are  to  baptize  any  one ;  we  bid  him  say, 

*  /  believe  the  resurrection  of  the  dead :  and  in  this 
'  faith  we  baptize  him.     For  after  we  have  owned 

*  that  together  with  the  rest,  we  are  plunged  down 

*  into  the  fountain  of  those  holy  waters.'  But 
though  this  would  make  one  think  that  the  resur- 
rection was  the  last  article  of  the  creed  then  used  in 
that  church  ;  yet  before  the  end  of  that  homily  (and 

"  At  §.  lo.  X  On  the  Creed,  art.  i  2. 


472  Roman  Creed,  called  the  Apostles'  Creed. 

CHAP,   bishop  Pearson,  it  seems,  did  not  at  that  time  read 

^^'      it  out)  St.  Chrjsostom  adds,  '  And  then,  since  the 

Year  after  '  word  t'esKrvectlon    is    not    enoudi    to    signify    the 

the  apo-  °  o        J 

sties.  *  whole  of  our  faith  in  that  matter,  (because  many, 

'  that  have  risen,  have  died  again  ;  as  they  in  the 
'  Old  Testament,  as  Lazarus,  as  they  at  the  time  of 
'  the  crucifixion,)  therefore  he  [the  baptizer]  bids 
'  him  [the  baptized  person]  say,  mid  the  life  ever- 
'  lasting ;  that  none  may  suspect  he  shall  die  again 
'  after  that  resurrection.' 

This  creed  of  the  church  of  Rome  has  obtained 
the  name  of  the  Apostolic  Creed,  for  no  greater  or 
other  reason  than  this  ;  it  was  a  custom  to  call  those 
churches,  in  which  any  apostle  had  personally 
taught,  especially  if  he  had  resided  there  any  long 
time,  or  had  died  there,  apostolic  churches.  Of 
these  were  a  great  many  in  the  eastern  parts ;  Jeru- 
salem, Corinth,  Ephesus,  Antioch,  &;c. ;  but  in  the 
western  parts  none  but  Rome.  In  which  St.  Paul 
and  St.  Peter  had  lived  a  considerable  time,  and 
were  there  martyred.  So  that  any  one  that  in  the 
western  parts  of  the  world  spoke  of  the  apostolic 
church,  was  supposed  to  mean  Rome ;  that  being 
the  only  one  in  those  parts,  and  being  called  empha- 
tically by  all  the  western  Christians  the  apostolic 
church.  And  so  their  bishop  came  to  be  called  the 
apostolic  bishop ;  their  see,  the  apostolic  see  ;  their 
faith,  the  apostolic  faith  ;  and  among  the  rest,  the 
creed  that  they  used,  the  Apostolic  Creed. 

This  name  gave  handle  enough  to  some  people 
first  to  imagine,  and  then  by  degrees  to  report  a  tra- 
dition, that  this  creed  was  drawn  up  into  this  form 
by  the  apostles  themselves ;  and  so  (by  a  light  alter- 
ation of  the  word)  to  call  it,  the  Apostles'  Creed. 


Roman  Creed,  called  the  Apostles'  Creed.  473 

There  was  a  fable  trimmed  up.  setting  forth  when  chap. 

.  .  IX. 

and  where  the  apostles  met  and  dictated  it ;  and  the 


reasons  why  they  did  it.  Which  if  any  one  do  still  ^^g^^J  o^^*^"* 
believe,  he  may  have  ready  cure  in  a  treatise  of  sties. 
Vossius  y ;  or  in  English,  in  a  treatise  of  a  very 
learned  English  gentleman  %  both  written  on  that 
subject.  If  the  Roman  Christians  had  believed  it 
themselves,  they  had  done  very  arrogantly  to  add 
from  time  to  time  new  clauses  to  the  apostles' 
words. 

About  the  year  of  Christ  600,  it  seems  to  havesoo- 
attained  that  whole  form  of  words  which  it  has 
now.  And  being  used  at  Rome  as  the  ordinary 
creed  for  the  baptized  or  their  godfathers  to  repeat, 
it  has  been  likewise  received  by  ail  the  western 
churches  for  the  same  use.  The  Greek  church  do, 
I  think,  catechise  by  the  Nicene  Creed,  but  they 
own  this  also.  When  the  two  great  branches  of 
Christendom  in  the  eastern  and  western  empire 
could  not  bring  their  people  to  use  the  same  form  of 
faith  at  baptism ;  yet  to  shew  their  unity  in  the 
faith,  they  did  each  of  them  receive  the  other's  creed 
into  their  liturgies ;  and  both  churches  do  own  and 
use  and  profess  both  creeds.  And  so  this  is  by  all 
owned  to  be  an  apostolic  creed  in  one  sense,  viz. 
drawn  up  according  to  the  doctrine  of  the  apostles. 
But  whereas  the  gentleman  I  mentioned  says  %  '  it 

y  De  tribus   Symbolis.  [4to.  Amstelodami,  1642  ;  and  in  the 
Collection  of  Vossius'  works,  6  vols,  folio,  1701.] 

z  Critical  History  of  the  Apostles'  Creed.  [See  the  history  of  • 
the  Apostles'  Creed,  with  critical  observations  on  its  several 
articles  (published  anonymously,  by  Sir  Peter  King,  afterwards 
Lord  Chancellor  of  England)  8vo.  London,  1703,  1711,  &c.] 

a  Critical  Hist.  p.  47. 


474  Athanasius*  Creed. 

CHAP.  '  has  been  for  some  hundred  years  preferred  before 

'      *  the  Nicene ;'  that  is,  I  think,  only  in  the  western 

Year  after  church.     And  where  he  says^  that  Irenaeus  repeats 

the  apo- 
stles,        the  Apostles'  Creed,  he  means  only  the  substance  of 

that  faith. 

It  is  general,  and  it  is  natural,  for  every  one  to 
say  as  much  as  he  can  in  preference  of  those  forms 
that  are  in  use  in  his  church.  But  yet  upon  the 
whole,  I  cannot  see  but  that  the  Greek  church  have 
in  this  the  advantage  of  us,  in  baptizing  by  the 
Nicene.  For  (besides  that  theirs  is  the  elder,  and 
acknowledged  and  enjoined  by  the  firet  four  general 
councils)  the  main  difference  between  these  two 
creeds  being  this,  that  the  western  creed  (as  it  is 
now)  has  the  descent  into  hell,  which  the  other  has 
not ;  but  the  other  has  the  articles  of  the  divinity  of 
the  Son  and  Holy  Spirit  much  more  full  and  ex- 
press ;  there  is,  I  think,  nobody  that  doubts  but 
the  latter  are  a  much  more  material  point  of  our 
faith  than  the  former.  But  yet  in  the  Roman  Creed 
(as  it  has  always  been  understood)  the  clause,  God's 
only  Son,  does  mean  his  Son  by  nature,  and  so  owns 
his  divinity,  as  bishop  Pearson  has  shewn.  And 
since  it  is  the  settled  and  notorious  interpretation  and 
meaning,  they  that  pronounce  it,  meaning  other- 
wise, do  but  equivocate  with  God  and  the  church. 
To  believe  in  a  person,  is,  in  the  phrase  of  Scripture 
and  of  the  church,  to  believe  him  to  be  God. 

Of  Athanasius'  Creed  there  is  no  occasion  of 
speaking  here,  both  because  it  was  never  by  any 
church  used  at  baptism,  and  also  because  the  com- 
posure of  it  is  not  so  ancient  as  the  times  we  speak 
of.  Yet  it  contains  the  sense  of  what  Athanasius  and 
'"  Critical  Hist.  p.  78. 


Athanasius'  Creed.  475 

the  other  catholics  maintained  in  their  disputations  chap. 
against  the  Arians ;  but  it  proceeds  also   to  deter- 


Year  after 


mine  against  other   heretics   that   arose   long  after  jj^g'^Jp^oJ 

Athanasius'    time:    as   Nestorius,  that   divided   the**^^*^^- 

240. 

person  of  Christ  into  two  ;  and  Eutyches,  that  con-33o- 
founded  his  two  natures  into  one.  And  it  is  penned 
in  a  more  scholastical  style  than  the  ancients  had  ar- 
rived to.  The  expressions  most  like  it,  that  are 
found  in  any  ancient  writing,  are  in  that  declaration 
of  the  faith  made  at  the  council  of  Chalcedon  (which  351- 
condemned  all  the  said  heresies  together)  recited  by 
Evagrius,  lib.  ii.  c.  4. 

What  creed  the  antipsedobaptists  do  require  of 
their  candidates  to  profess,  I  know  not:  I  am  afraid, 
none  at  all.  I  mean  no  settled  form,  limited  to 
certain  words  :  but  that  it  is  left  to  the  several 
elders  to  judge  whether  each  candidate  do  under- 
stand and  believe  the  necessary  points  of  faith. 
Which  must  be  a  very  unsafe  way :  for  either  the 
elder  himself  may  be  ignorant,  or  he  may  hold 
privately  heterodox  opinions  in  the  fundamentals 
of  the  faith,  as  Socinianism,  &c.  For  such  an  one 
to  have  the  instructing  of  any  young  person  in  his 
own  way,  and  then  to  baptize  him,  is  (as  Gregory 
Nazianzen  ^  in  a  case  not  so  bad  expresses  it)  not  to 
dip  him,  but  to  drown  him.  The  experience  of  all 
ages  of  the  Church  has  shewn  it  necessary  to  have  a 
form  of  sound  ivords  for  such  an  use  ;  not  to  be 
altered,  augmented,  or  curtailed,  by  the  caprices  of 
every  particular  pastor. 

XIV.    These    professions   of  Christian  faith,  and 

t'  Orat.  iu  Sanctum  Baptisma^  prope  finein.  [Orat.  40.  sect.  45. 
p.  727.  edit.  Benedict. — Gregory's  words  are,  (rjTd  t6v  ^unTiarrfjv 
^  KaTa^anriarTji'.'] 


476  Professions  made  itcice  hy  the  Adult. 

CHAP,  of  renouncing  the  Devil  and  his  works,  &c.,  were  by 

'      adult   persons   solemnly   made   two    several   times, 

Year  after  i^gfore  thev  wero  baptized.     Once  in  the  congres^a- 

the  apo-  J  1  e      C3 

sties.  tion,  some  time  before  the  day  of  baptism :  where 
they,  standing  up  and  speaking  in  a  continued  sen- 
tence,  said ;    '  I   renounce   the    Devil    and    all    his 

*  works,'  &c.  going  on  through  all  the  clauses  of 
renunciation :  and  in  like  manner  repeated  the 
whole  creed. 

And  again,  just  when  they  were  going  into  the 
water,  by  way  of  answer  to  the  interrogatories  of 
the  priest,  who  laying  his  hand  on  the  party's  head, 
solemnly  asked  the  questions  severally,  '  Do  you 
'  renounce  the  Devil  ?'  &;c.  he  answered,  '  I  do.'  And 
so  he  asked  the  other  renunciations.  And  then  the 
belief:  '  Do  you  believe  in  God  the  Father  Al- 
'  mighty?'  '  I  do.'  And  so  the  several  articles  of 
the  creed.     And  at  last ;  *  Do  you  believe  the  resur- 

*  rection  of  the  flesh,  and  the  life  everlasting?'  he 
said,  '  I  do.' 

And  therefore  that  clause  in  Tertullian  which  I 
recited  at  ^.4.  is  to  be  pointed  thus  :  '  We  do  there 
'  (and  we  do  the  same  also  a  little  before  in  the  con- 
'  gregation)  under  the  hands  of  the  pastor  make  a 
'  profession,'  &;c. 

St.  Austin  mentions  the  former  of  these  times 
of  profession  ^  in  the  case  of  Victorinus :  who  was  a 
man  in  such  dignity  and  repute  among  the  heathen 
party  at  Rome,  that  though  he  made  a  pretence  of 
turning  Christian,  and  came  sometimes  to  their 
assemblies ;  yet  the  Christians  did  not  believe  that 
he  would  really  come  over  to  their  religion  (which 
was  even  then  in  contempt  among  the  great  men  at 

''  Confess,  lib.  viii.  c.  2.  [Op.  torn.  i.  p.  146.] 


Professions  made  twice  hy  the  Adult.  477 

Rome,)  till  they  saw  and  heard   him,  at  a  certain  chap. 
time  when  he  was  at  their  church,  that  '  when  the  ___11_ 


'  time  came  of  professino^  the  faith,  which  is  wont  X^^"^  ^'^'^'^ 

A  o  '  the  apo- 

'  to  be  done  at  Rome  in  a  place  a  little  raised  in  the^''^*- 
'  sight  of  the  faithful   people  by  those   that  would 
'  come   to  the  grace   [viz.  of  baptism],  he  with  an 
'  assured  voice  pronounced  the  faith,'  &c. 

And  St.  Hierome  mentions  the  latter  ^  when  he 
says,  '  Whereas  it  is  customary  at  the  font,  after 
'  the  confession  of  the  Trinity,  to  ask,  "  Do  you 
'  believe  the  holy  church  ?  Do  you  believe  the  for- 
*  giveness  of  sins  ?  &c."  ' 

But  in  the  case  of  infants  this  could  be  done  but 
once,  viz.  at  the  time  of  their  baptism.  The  bap- 
tizer  asked  the  questions,  and  the  sponsors  an- 
swered in  the  name  of  the  child.  The  questions 
were  put  severally  for  each  article  of  the  creed  and 
of  the  renunciation,  as  in  the  case  of  the  adult : 
as  appears  partly  by  what  I  quoted  out  of  St.  Austin, 
part  i.  ch.  15,  sect.  5.  §.  4.  and  out  of  the  author 
of  the  Ecclesiastical  Hierarchy,  part  i.  ch.  xxiii. 
§.  2.  And  also  by  what  St.  Austin  says  at  another 
place  ^,  where  speaking  of  an  infant  going  to  be 
baptized  he  says,  '  The  interrogation  is  put,  "  Does 
'  he  believe  in  Jesus  Christ?"  Answer  is  made, 
'  "  He  does."  ' 

There  is  no  time  or  age  of  the  church  in  which 
there  is  any  appearance  that  infants  were  ordinarily 
baptized  without  sponsors  or  godfathers.     Tertullian  too. 
mentions  the  use  of  them  in  his  time,  as  I  shewed  ^. 

e  Adversus  Luciferianos.  [Op.  torn.  ii.  ed.  Vallars.] 
f  Serm.  14.  de  Verbis  Apost.  [or,  in  the  Benedictine  edition, 
Serm.  294.  Op.  torn.  v.  p.  1183.  see  sect.  12.] 
§■  Part  i.  ch.  iv.  §.  9. 


478  Infants  receiving  the  Communion. 

CHAP.   And  I  have  recited  so  many  other  passages  wherein 

'. they    are  occasionally  mentioned,  that  there   is  no 

riirapo-'^^'^  need  of  rehearsing  any  more  on   purpose   for  that 

sties.         matter.     St.  Austin  calls  the  professions,  '  words  of 

'  the    sacrament,    without    which    an  infant  cannot 

'  be  baptized.'     As  I  shewed,  part  i.  ch.  15.  sect.  5. 

§.5. 

XV.  The  baptized  person  was  quickly  after  his 
baptism  admitted  to  partake  of  the  Lord's  supper. 
This  was  always  and  in  all  places  used  in  the  case 
of  adult  persons  :  and  in  some  ages  and  places  in 
the  case  of  infants.  Some  have  spoken  of  the  cus- 
tom of  giving  infants  the  communion,  as  if  it  were 
anciently  as  general  as  the  baptizing  them  :  and  the 
antipsedobaptists  do  confidently  say  it  was  so.  But 
this  has  been  by  others  shewn  to  be  a  mistake. 

Mr.  Daille,  in  his  treatise  called  the  '  Right  Use 
'  of  the  Fathers,'  bent  himself  with  all  his  might 
to  find  out  errors  in  the  Fathers  and  ancient  church. 
Not  indeed  with  so  wicked  a  purpose  as  some  have 
done  since,  that  have  made  use  of  his  instances  to 
take  away  all  credit  from  the  primitive  church  in 
conveying  down  to  us  the  canonical  books,  and  the 
fundamental  doctrines  in  them  delivered  :  but  yet 
he  has  made  it  hard  for  us  to  believe  what  he  there 
says,  that  he  '  enters  upon  this  inquiry  into  their 
*  errors  unwillingly ;'  because  a  man  that  does  so, 
never  makes  the  faults  more  or  worse  than  they 
are.  He  makes  the  giving  the  eucharist  to  infants 
one  of  their  chief  errors  :  and  to  ])rove  that  this  was 
their  practice,  he  quotes  three  authors ;  Cyprian, 
vVustin,  and  pope  Innocent.  And  adds,  '  All  the 
'  rest  of  the  doctors,  in  a  manner,  of  the  first  ages 
'  maintained   that   the    eucharist    was  necessary  for 


Infants  receiving  the  Communion.  479 

infants  ;  if  at  least  you  dare  take  Maldonatus'  word,  chap. 

IX 

who  affirms  that  this  opmion  was  in  great  request  __11_ 


'  in  the   church  durins^  the  first  six  hundred  years  "V*"^""  ^f^*''" 

<^  •'  the  apo- 

'  after  our  Saviour  Christ.'  And  after  this  he,  se-  sties. 
veral  times  without  any  further  proof*',  says  abso- 
lutely that  so  it  was  ;  '  That  the  Fathers,  down  as 
'  far  as  to  the  end  of  the  sixth  century,  held  that  the 
'  eucharist  is  as  necessary  to  salvation  as  baptism  ; 
'  and  consequently  to  be  administered  to  infants  ;' 
and  concludes  from  that,  as  from  one  of  his  two 
chief  instances,  how  little  heed  is  to  be  given  to  the 
practice  of  the  primitive  Christians. 

And  yet  all  that  he  quotes  from  Maldonat,  and 
all  that  I  believe  that  learned  man  would  say,  (for  T 
have  not  the  book,)  is  this ' ;  '  I  pass  by  the  opinion 
'  of  Austin  and  Innocent  the  first,  which  was  in 
'  request  in  the  church  for  above  six  hundred  years, 
'  that  the  eucharist  is  necessary  for  infants.' 

No  man  (but  one  that  would  fain  have  it  so) 
would  conclude  from  these  words  Maldonat's  mean- 
ing to  be  any  more  than  this;  that  this  opinion 
besan  in  the  time  of  Austin  and  Innocent,  anno  400. 300. 
and  continued  from  thence  six  hundred  years,  to 
anno   1000  (as  it  did   indeed  in  some   parts  of  the  900- 


^  Lib.  ii.  cap.  6.  et  passim. 

»  Maldonatus  in  Joan.  vi.  apud  Dallseum,  lib.  i.  cap.  8.  [The 
words  of  Maldonatus  are  these  :  '  IMissam  facio  Augustini  et  In- 
'  nocentii  primi  sententiam,  quae  sexcentos  circiter  annos  viguit 
'  in  Ecclesia,  eucharistiam  etiam  infantibus  necessariara.  Res 
*  jam  ab  ecclesia  et  multorum  sseculorum  usu,  et  decreto  Concilii 
'  Tridentini  expUcata  est,  non  solum  necessarian!  illis  non  esse, 
'  sed  ne  licere  quidem  dari.' — Maldonati  Commentarii  in  quatuor 
Evangehstas,  fol,  Lut.  Par.  1629. — Comm.  in  Joann.  cap.  vi.  53, 
sect.  1 16. — Compare  sect.  109,  sqq.] 


480  Of  communicating  Infants. 

CHAP,  church,  not  that  it  was  in  request  for  all  the^r*^ 
six  hundred  years. 


Ihel^o^^''  Before  the  year  412,  there  is  no  author  produced 
sties.  ]3y^  g^  Cyprian.  And  whereas  Mr.  Daille  speaks 
■  with  the  usual  artifice  in  such  cases,  as  if  he  singled 
this  out  of  a  great  many  instances  which  he  could 
have  brought,  and  says  ^,  that  St.  Cyprian  was  car- 
ried away  with  the  error  of  his  time  :  the  truth  of 
the  matter,  I  believe,  is,  that  neither  he  nor  any 
body  else  can  find  any  more.  And  if  we  examine 
what  it  is  that  he  produces  from  him,  we  shall  per- 
ceive that  he  has,  in  his  case  too,  much  mistaken 
the  matter ;  and  that,  so  far  from  his  saying  it  was 
necessary,  there  is  no  good  proof  from  him  that 
mere  infants  ever  did  receive  it ;  though  of  children 
of  four  or  five  years  of  age,  that  then  did  sometimes 
in  that  church  receive,  there  is. 

The  first  proof  that  is  brought,  and  the  most 
material  by  far,  if  it  were  not  from  a  mistaken  edi- 
tion, is  out  of  the  Fifty-ninth  Epistle  of  St.  Cyprian, 
(which  is  the  sixty-fourth  in  the  late  edition ',)  from 
one  word  of  which  epistle  he  would  prove  that  it 
was  the  opinion  of  Cyprian  and  of  the  sixty-six 
bishops  then  assembled  with  him,  that  the  eucharist 
must  be  given  to  infants.  But  of  that  epistle  you 
have  all  that  concerns  infants  in  my  part  i.  ch.  6. 
where  I  have  shewn  at  §.  10.  that  Mr.  Daille's  ob- 
servation is  a  mistake  in  the  reading  of  that  one 
word,  and  that  there  is  in  the  correct  editions  not 
one  syllable  about  it. 


^  Lib.  ii.  cap.  4. 

1  [Viz.  59  in  Pamelius'  edition,  64  in  that  of  bishop  Fell,  and 
59  in  the  Benedictine.] 


Of  communicating  Infants.  4S1 

He  i^roduces  another  passage  of  St.  Cyprian,  which  chap. 
is  the  same  I  quoted   out  of  him   in   the   foresaid  _J^^ 
eh.  vi.  t^.  13.     St.  Cyprian's  commonplace   book  ran '^''''''' ''*'*^'" 
thus  ;  lib.  ad  Quirinum  '°.  sties'!^'"' 

C.  25.  '  If  any  one  be  not  baptized  and  born  again, 

'  he  cannot  come  to  the  kingdom  of  God.' 
For  proof  of  this   he  quotes  John  iii.  5,  6.  item 
John  vi.  53. 

C.  26.  '  To  be  baptized  and  receive  the  eucharist 

'  is  not  available,  unless  one  do  good  works.' 
For  this  he   quotes   1  Cor.  ix.  24  :  Matt.  iii.  10. 
item  vii.  22.  item  v.  16. 

I  did  indeed  bring  this  place  among  the  proofs 
of  his  opinion  that  infants  must   be  baptized  :    but 
owned  at  the  same  time,  that  since  infants  are  not 
expressly  mentioned  in  it,  it  would  be  but  a  very 
weak  one,  were  it  not  that  he  himself  in  other  places 
mentions  infants  by  name  as   contained  under   the 
general  rule  that  requires  baptism  ;   which  he  never 
does  in  the  case  of   the   eucharist.     And   any  one 
sees  that   this  passage  taken  alone  has   much   less 
force  to  prove  their  communicating,  than  it  has  to 
prove  the  necessity  of  their  baptism.     If  I  should, 
among  the  testimonies  for  infants'  baptism,  have  set 
down   all   the   sayings  of  the   Fathers,  where   they 
speak  of  baptism  as  necessary  for  all  persons ;  those 
alone  would  have  made  a  collection  larger  than  mine 
is:  I  confined   myself  to  such    as   mention  infants 
particularly. 

But  for  youths,  boys  or  girls  younger  than  do 
now  commonly  receive,  he  does  indeed  quote  a  plain 
proof  out  of  the  book  de  Lapsis.     It  is  this  story 

"'  [P.  72.  edit.  Fellii.p.  314.  ed.  Benedict.] 

WALL,   VOL.  ir.  I  i 


482  Of  communicating  Infants. 

CHAP,  which  St.  Cyprian  tells,  on  purpose  to  make  those 

^^'      that  had  revolted  to  idolatry  in  the  late  persecution 

Year  after  ^^  Carthaofo   Sensible  of  their    ffuilt   and    of  God's 

the  apo-  "-'  ^ 

sties.         wrath  ;  and  that  they  ought  not  without  due  con- 
fession and  penitence  approach  the  holy  table". 
'  I    will    tell    you    what    happened    in    my    own 

*  presence.     The  parents  of  a  certain  little  girl,  run- 

*  ning  out  of  town  in  a  fright,  had  forgot  to  take 

*  any  care  of  their  child,  whom  they  had  left  in  the 
'  keeping  of  a  nurse.     The  nurse  had  carried  her  to 

*  the  magistrates  :  they,  because  she  was  too  little 
'  to  eat  the  flesh,  gave  her  to  eat  before  the  idol 

*  some  of  the  bread  mixed   with  wine,  wdiich   had 

*  been  left  of  the  sacrifice  of  those  wretches.  Since 
'  that  time  her  mother  took  her  home.     But   she 

*  was  no  more  capable  of  declaring  and  telling  the 
'  crime  committed,  than  she  had  been  before  of  un- 
'  derstanding   or   of  hindering  it.     So   it   happened 

*  that  once  when  I  was  administering,  her  mother, 
'  ignorant  of  what  had  been  done,  brought  her  along 
'  with   her.     But  the   girl  being  among  the  saints 

*  could  not  with  any  quietness  hear  the  prayers  said  ; 

*  but  sometimes   fell   into  weeping,  and   sometimes 

*  into  convulsions,  with  the  uneasiness  of  her  mind  : 

*  and  her  ignorant  soul,  as  under  a  wrack,  declared 
'  by  such  tokens  as  it  could,  the  conscience  of  the 
'  fact  in  those  tender  years.  And  when  the  service 
'  was  ended  ;  and  the  deacon  w^ent  to  give  the   cup 

*  to  those  that  were  present,  and  the  others  received 

*  it,  and  her  turn  came  ;  the  girl  by  a  divine  instinct 

*  turned  away  her  face,  shut  her  mouth,  and  refused 
'  the  cup.     But  yet  the  deacon  persisted  :  and  put 

n  Lib.    de    Lapsis,    circa    medium,   [p.  132.  edit.  Fell.  p.  189. 
ed.  Benedict.] 


Of  communicating  Infants,  483 

*  into   her  mouth,   though  she   refused  it,  some   of  chap. 

*  the  sacrament  of  the  cup.     Then  followed  reach-       ^^' 


*  insfs  and  vomitino^.     The  eucharist  could  not  stay  \^^^  ^^^^ 

on  J  the  apo- 

'  in  her  polluted  mouth  and  body  ;  the  drink  conse- sties. 

*  crated  in  our  Lord's  blood  burst  out   again  from 

*  her  defiled  bowels.  Such  is  the  power,  such  the 
'  majesty  of  our  Lord  :   the  secrets  of  darkness  were 

*  discovered  by  its  light :  even  unknown  sins  could 
'  not  deceive  the  priest  of  God.     This  happened  in 

*  the  case  of  an  infant  who  was  by  reason  of  her 
'  age  incapable   of  declaring   the   crime  which   an- 

*  other  had  acted  on  her.'  He  goes  on  to  tell  how 
some  grown  people  at  the  same  table,  guilty  of  the 
same  crime,  but  thinking  to  conceal  it,  had  been 
more  severely  handled ;  possessed  with  evil  spi- 
rits, &c. 

This  child  was  probably  four  or  five  years  old. 
For  the  heat  of  the  persecution  was  about  two  years 
before  this  administering  of  the  sacrament  could  be, 
if  we  reckon  the  soonest :  for  St.  Cyprian  had  been 
almost  all  that  while  retired  out  of  the  city,  as  ap- 
pears by  bishop  Pearson's  Annals  of  that  time**. 
And  the  child  may  be  guessed  by  the  story  to  have 
been  two  or  three  years  old,  when  she  M^as  carried 
to  the  idol  feast.  And  so  the  Magdeburgenses,  re- 
lating this  story P,  conclude  from  it,  puellas  ephebas, 
that  young  girls  did  at  this  time  sometimes  receive. 
And  so  Salmasius,  or  else  Suicerus  himself.  Suiceri 
Thesaur.  v.  Swa^/?, 

This  passage  might  have  been  added  to  the  other 
quotations  that  I  brought  of  St.  Cyprian  for  infants" 

o  Annales  C'yprianici,  [prefixed  to  Fell's  edition  of  Cyprian, 
1682.] 

^  Cent.  iii.  cap.  6. 

I  i  2 


484  Communicating  In/ants,  when  begun. 

CHAP,  baptism  ;  for  no  church  ever  gave  the  communion 

^^'      to  any  persons   before  they  were  baptized :    but  I 

Year  after  j-eservecl  it  for  this  i)lace.     This  is  all,  till  above  four 

the  apo-  ' 

sties.  hundred  years  after  Christ's  birth  ;  save  that  in  the 
passage  which  I,  part  i.  ch.  vi.  §.11,  recited  of  St. 
Cyprian  De  Lapsis,  there  are  some  words  sounding 
that  way. 

Innocent  the  First,  bishop  of  Rome,  does  indeed, 
31 7-  anno  417,  plainly  and  positively  say,  that  infants 
cannot  be  saved  without  receiving  the  eucharist : 
and  that  in  a  synodical  epistle?  written  to  the  Fa- 
thers of  the  Milevitan  council.  The  council  had 
represented  to  him  the  mischief  of  that  tenet  of  the 
Pelagians,  that  nnbaptized  infants,  though  they 
cannot  go  to  heaven,  yet  may  have  eternal  life ; 
which  the  Pelagians  maintained  on  this  pretence, 
that  our  Saviour,  though  he  had  said,  He  that  is 
not  born  of  wafer  cannot  enter  the  kingdom^  yet 
had  not  said,  he  cannot  have  an  eternal  life.  To 
this.  Innocent's  words  are ;  '  That  which  your  bro- 
'  therhood  says  that  they  teach,  "  that  infants  may 
'  without  the  grace  of  baptism  have  eternal  life,  is 
'  very  absurd :  since,  Ecvcept  they  eat  the  flesh  of 
'  file  Son  of  Man  ^,  and  drink  his  blood,  they  have 
'  no  life  in  them,'"  '  &c.  His  meaning  is  plainly  this ; 
they  can  have  no  eternal  life  without  receiving  the 
communion ;  and  they  cannot  do  that,  till  they  be 
baptized.  And  it  is  true  what  JNIr.  Daille  urges'" ; 
'  That  St.  Austin  says  the  same  thing  eight  or  ten 
'  times  over  in  several  places  of  his  books.'     And 

p  Apud  Augustin.  Ep.  gv  [Epist.  1S2.  ed.  Benedict.  See  it, 
among  Innocent's  Epistles,  No.  25  ;  in  the  Councils  by  Mansi, 
vol.  iii.  p.  17/j.] 

q  John  vi.  53.  «■  Lib.  i.  cap.  8. 


Communicating  Infants,  when  begun,  485 

some  of  these  books  are  dated  a  little  before  this  ^^^  ^' 
letter  of  Innocent.     But  though  he  wrote  a  great  — 


302. 


part  of  his  works  before  this  Innocent  was  made  the  apo- 
bishop  of  Rome,  and  in  them  speaks  often  of  infant-*^^^^" 
baptism  ;  yet  it  is  observable,  that  he  never  speaks 
of  infants  communicating  till  after  Innocent  had 
been  bishop  some  time  :  which  makes  me  think  it 
probable  that  Innocent  did  first  bring  up  this  doc- 
trine of  the  necessity  of  this  sacrament  to  infants  : 
for  after  Innocent  had  so  determined,  St.  Austin 
oftener  quotes  him^  for  it,  than  he  does  any  place 
of  Scripture. 

P.  S.  I  am  glad  to  find  so  learned  a  man  as  John 
Frith  is  of  the  same  mind.  '  Answer  to  More^' 
That  Innocent  was  the  author  of  the  Necessity  of 
Communicating  Infants. 

Among  all  the  passages  of  St.  Austin  to  this 
purpose,  there  is  need  of  mentioning  but  one :  and 
that  because  some  people  have  said  that  he  at  that 
place  does  affirm  it  to  be  an  apostolical  tradition ; 
from  whence  they  conclude  how  little  heed  is  to  be 
given  to  him,  when  he  says  infant-baptism  was  so. 
The  place  is,  De  Peccatorum  Meritis,  lib.  i.  cap.  24". 
He  is  arguing  against  the  Pelagians,  who  said, 
eternal  life  (though  not  the  kingdom  of  God)  might 
be  had  without  baptism  :  and  says  thus ;  '  The 
'  Christians  of  Africa  do  well  call  baptism  itself 
'  one's  salvation  ;  and  the  sacrament  of  Christ's 
*  body,  one's  life.     From  whence  is  this,  but,  as  I 

s  Epist.  106.  et  alibi,  [186  in  edit.  Benedict.] 
t   [Printed    at    Munster    in    1513  :    and,   with    the  works    vi 
Tyndal  and  Barnes,  at  London,  fol.  1573.] 
u   [Op.  torn.  X.  p.  ig.  ed.  Benedict.] 


486  Hoic  long  continued  in  the  West. 

CHAP.  '  suppose,  from  that  ancient  and  apostolical  tradition, 

'. —  '  by  which  the  churches  of  Christ  do  naturally  hold 

Spo-'^'   '  ^h^t  without  baptism  and  j)artaking  of  the  Lord's 
"^^^-  '  table   none   can   come   either  to   the   kingdom   of 

*  God,  or  to  salvation  and  eternal  life  ?  For  the 
'  Scripture,  as  I  shewed  before,  says  the  same.  For 
'  what  other  thing  do  they  hold,  that  call  baptism 
'  sahatio7i,   than    that   which   is   said,  He  saved   us 

*  by  the  washing  of  regeneration  :'  and  that  which 
Peter  says, '  The  like  figure  ivhereunto,  even  baptism^ 
'  doth  now  save  us  ?  And  what  other  thing  do 
'  they  hold,  that  call  the  sacrament  of  the  Lord's 
'  table  life^  than  that  which  is  said,  /  am  the  bread 

*  of  life,  &c.;  and.   The  bread  which  I  will  give,  is 

*  my  flesh,  which  I  will  give  for  the  life  of  the  ivorld; 
'  and,  Ej'cept  ye  eat  the  flesh  of  the  Son  of  Man,  and 
'  drink  his  blood,  ye  have  no  life  in  you  ?  If  then, 
'  as   so   many  divine   testimonies  do  agree,  neither 

*  salvation  nor  eternal  life  is  to  be  hoped  for  by  any 

*  without  baptism  and  the  body  and  blood  of  our 
'  Lord  ;   it  is   in  vain   promised  to   infants  without 

*  them.' 

There  is  (as  I  observed  a  little  before)  a  great 
difference  between  saying,  '  There  is  a  tradition  or 
'  order   of   the   apostles  for   infants  to   receive  the 

*  eucharist,  as  a  thing  without  which  they  cannot  be 

*  saved ;'  and  saying,  '  There  is  a  tradition  for  oil  to 

*  receive  it,  as  a  thing  without  which  they  cannot 
'  be  saved.'  For  a  rule  given  in  general  words  may 
be  understood  with  an  exception  of  infants,  or  with- 
out such  exception,  according  as  the  nature  of  the 
thing,  or  other  sayings  of  the  Lawgiver  do  direct. 
All   the   Israelites   that   do   not   keep  the  passover 


How  long  continued  in  the  West.  487 

shall   be   cut  off.     There  very   young   infants  must   chap. 
be  excepted.     They  must  all  be  circumcised.     That      ^^' 


includes  infants,  as  well  as  others.  Now  in  the '^'^^'' ^^'^'''" 
case  of  baj)tism,  St.  Austin  and  those  others  whom  sties, 
we  have  quoted  do  say,  there  is  a  tradition  from 
the  apostles  for  baptizing  infants.  But  all  that 
St.  Austin  says  here,  in  the  case  of  the  eucharist, 
is  in  general,  that  there  is  an  apostolical  tradition 
that  none  that  do  not  receive  it  can  have  salvation. 
And  that  this  rule  should  include  infants  is  not 
said  as  from  the  apostles,  but  is  only  his  own  con- 
sequence drawn  from  the  general  rule;  neither  do 
his  words  import  any  more :  in  which  consequence 
there  may  easily  be  a  mistake. 

XVI.  After  these  times  of  St.  Austin  and  Innocent, 
there  is  ever  now  and  then  some  mention  found  in 
the  Latin  church  of  infants  receiving;  Mercator^, 
subnot.  8.  in  the  year  435 ;  Gregory  the  First  y,  335- 
Sacramentar.  anno  590;  and  so  forward  till  about  49°- 
the  year  1000.  But  toward  the  latter  end  of  this 
term,  as  we  learn  by  the  relation  of  Hugo  de  Sancto 
Victore%  who  lived  anno  1100,  they  gave  to  infants 
only  the  wine,  and  that  only  by  the  priest's  dipping 
his  finger  in  the  chalice,  and  then  putting  it  into 
the  child's  mouth  for  him  to  suck.  And  after  some 
time,  this  also  was  left  off;  and  instead  of  it,  they 
gave  the  new-baptized  infant  some  drops  of  wine 
not  consecrated,  which  Hugo  dislikes. 

This  custom   of  giving  common   wine  to   infants 

^   [See  M.  Mercatoris  Opera,  2.  torn,  folio,  Paris.  1673.] 

y   [See  this  in  vol.  iii.  of  the  Benedictine  edition  of  Gregory's 

Works,  4  vols,  folio,  Paris,  1705,] 

z  Lib.  iii.  de  Sacram.  cap.  20.   [See  this  in  the  collection  of 

'  auctores  de  Divinis  Officiis/  &c.,  quoted  above,  at  page  424,] 


488  How  long  continued  in  the  West. 

CHAP,  seems  by  some  words  of  St.  Hierome"  to  be  older 
^_11_  in  the  church  of  Rome  than  the  custom  of  giving 


Vear  after     ^      cousecratcd   wine.     For   instead    of  milk    and 

the  apo-  •' 

sties.  honey  he  speaks  there  (if  there  be  no  mistake  in 

^9°-  the  print)  of  wine  and  milk  given  to  the  new  bap- 
tized. '  In  the  churches  of  the  west,'  says  he,  '  the 
'  custom  and  type  still  continues,  of  giving  to  those 
'  that  are  regenerated  in  Christ  wine  and  milk.' 
900.  It  is  to  be  observed,  that  about  the  year  1000, 
the  doctrine  of  transubstantiation  sprung  up  in  the 
Latin  church,  which  created  an  excessive  and  su- 
perstitious regard  to  the  outward  elements  of  the 
eucharist ;  and  had  among  others  this  effect,  that  as 
the  wine  was  kept  from  the  laymen  for  fear  of  slab- 
bering, so  the  whole  sacrament  was  from  infants. 
1460.  And  at  last  the  council  of  Trent''  determined,  that 
'it  is  not  at  all  necessary  for  them  ;  since  being 
'  regenerated  by  the  laver  of  baptism,  and  incorpo- 
'  rated  into  Christ,  they  cannot  in  that  age  lose  the 
'  grace  of  being  children  of  God,  which  they  have 
'  now  obtained.  And  yet,  say  they,  antiquity  is  not 
'  to  be  condemned,  if  it  did  sometimes  and  in  some 
*  places  observe  that  custom  :  for  as  those  holy 
'  Fathers  had  a  probable  reason  of  their  so  doing 
'  on  account  of  that  time  [here  they  should  have 
'  added,  which  did  not  believe  transubstantiation]  ; 
'  so  it  is  for  certain,  and  without  controversy  to  be 
'  believed,  that  they  did  it  not  on  any  opinion  of 
'  its  necessity  to  their  salvation.'  And  then  they 
pass*^  this  anathema  :  '  If  any  one  shall  say  that 
'  partaking  of  the  eucharist  is  necessary  for  infants, 

a  Comment,    in    Esaiain,  lib.  xv.    [0\i.  tom.  iv.  ed.    Vallars.] 
Vide  Magdeburgenses,  Centnr.  4.  cap.  6 
l"  Sess.  21.  cap.  4.  c  Canon  4. 


How  long  continued  in  the  West.  489 

'  before  they  come  to  years  of  cliscretioii,  let  him  be  chap. 
'  anathema.'  ^_11_ 


It  is  a  brave  thinof  to  be  infallible.     Such  men  Y*^^'"  ^*'®'' 

"  the  aj)o- 

may  say  what  they  will,  and  it  shall  be  true.     Whaf^'i^s. 
is  a  contradiction  in  other  men's  mouths,  is  none  in 
theirs.     Pope  Innocent,  in  a  synodical  letter  sent  to  317- 
the  council  of  INIilevis,  says ;  '  If  infants  do  not  eat 
'  the  flesh  of  the  Son  of  Man,  and  drink  his  blood, 
'  [meaning  in  the  sacrament,]  they  have  no  life  in 
*  them.'     Pope   Pius,  in  confirming  the   council   of  '463- 
Trent,  says  ;  '  If  any  man  say  so,  let  him  be  ana- 
'  them  a.' 

To  deny  that  those  ancient  Fathers  did  it  with  any 
opinion  of  its  necessity  to  the  infant's  salvation, 
makes  the  contradiction  yet  more  palpable ;  because 
that  is  the  very  thing  which  they  say.  The  truth, 
I  believe,  is,  that  the  Trent  Fathers  knew  that  some 
ancient  doctors  had  commended  infants'  receiving : 
but  not  that  one  of  their  own  infallible  bishops  bad 
so  absolutely  determined  it  to  be  necessary  for  their 
salvation. 

How  soon,  or  how  late,  the  custom  of  infants' 
receiving  came  in,  in  the  Greek  church,  I  know  not. 
I  do  not  remember  any  one  ancient  writer  of  that 
part  of  the  world  that  speaks  of  it ;  I  mean  of  any 
genuine  book  :  for  I  know  that  a  mention  of  it  is 
got  into  the  Clementine  Constitutions.  But  it  is  a 
known  thing  that  they  use  it  now,  and  have  done 
for  several  centuries;  at  least  most  of  the  branches 
of  that  church . 

That  which  I  conceive  most  probable  on  the 
whole  matter  (referring  myself  to  such  as  have 
minded  this  piece  of  history  more)  is  ; 

1.   That    in    Cyprian's   time,   the    people    of   the   i-;o. 


490  What  Churches  do  still 

CHAP,  church  of  Carthage  did  oftentimes  bring  their  chil- 
__11_  dreii  younger  than  ordinary  to  the  communion. 
Year  after       g^  That  in  St.  Austin  and  Innocent's  time,  it  was  in 

the  apo- 
stles, the  west  parts  given  to  mere  infants.     And  that  this 

900.  continued  from  that  time  for  about  six  hundred  years. 

500.  3.  That  some  time  during  this  space  of  six  hun- 
dred years,  the  Greek  church,  which  was  then  low 
in  the  world,  took  this  custom  from  the  Latin 
church,  which  was  more  flourishing. 

4.  That  the  Roman  church,  about  the  year  1000, 
entertaining  the  doctrine  of  transubstantiation,  let 
fall  the  custom  of  giving  the  holy  elements  to 
infants.  And  the  other  western  churches,  mostly 
following  their  example,  did  the  like  upon  the  same 
account.  But  that  the  Greeks,  not  having  the  said 
doctrine,  continued,  and  do  still  continue,  the  custom 
of  communicating  infants.  They  think  that  com- 
mand of  St.  Paul,  Let  a  man  e<Tamine  himself,  and 
so  let  him  eat,  &c.  so  to  be  understood,  as  not  to 
exclude  such  as  are  by  their  age  incapable  of  exa- 
mining themselves  from  partaking,  but  only  to 
oblige  all  that  are  capable.  As  that  like  command 
of  his,  If  any  one  will  not  work,  let  him  have 
nothing  given  him  to  eat,  must  be  so  limited  to  such 
as  are  able  to  work,  as  that  infants,  and  such  as 
are  not  capable  to  work,  must  have  victuals  given 
them,  though  they  do  not  work. 

The  most  usual  way  of  giving  it  to  infants  in  the 
churches  where  it  is  now  used,  is  to  mix  the  bread 
with  the  wine,  and  to  put  to  the  child's  lips  a  drop 
or  two  of  that  mixture  quickly  after  his  baptism ; 
after  which  he  receives  no  more  till  the  age  of 
discretion. 

XVII.  From  this  custom  of  the  ancients  giving 


communicate  Infants.  491 

the   eucharist  to    infants,   the    antipsedobaptists    do  chap. 
draw  an  argument,  (and  it  is  the  most  considerable  ' 

that  they  have  for  that  purpose,)  that  there  is  no  ^j^*^"*^  ^^^^^ 
great  stress  to  be  laid  on  the  practice  of  antiquity  in  st'^^s- 
baptizing  infants.  For  they  say,  since  the  ancients 
gave  them  the  eucharist  as  well  as  baptism ;  and  yet 
all  Christians  are  now  satisfied  that  the  first  was  an 
error  in  them  ;  what  reason  have  we  to  regard  their 
opinion  or  practice  in  the  other  ? 

But,  1.  That  is  not  true,  that  Christians  are 
satisfied  that  the  ancients  did  ill  in  giving  infants 
the  eucharist ;  for  very  near  half  the  Christians  in 
the  world  do  still  continue  that  practice.  The 
Greek  church,  the  Armenians,  the  Maronites,  the 
Cophti,  the  Abassens,  and  the  Muscovites ;  as  is 
related  by  the  late  authors,  Jeremias,  Brerewood,  Al- 
varez, Rycaut,  Heylyn'\  &c.  And  so,  for  ought  I 
know,  do  all  the  rest  of  the  eastern  Christians.  And 
it  is  probable  that  the  western  had  done  the  same, 

d  [E.  Brerewood,  Enquiries  concerning  Languages  and  Reli- 
gion, 40.  London,  1614,  1622. 

Fr.  Alvarez,  Historia  de  las  cosas  de  Ethiopia,  80.  Anvers 
1557. — Reprinted  in  the  Collection  of  Voyages  by  Ramusio, 
1588.  The  original  work,  in  Portuguese,  was  printed  at  Lisbon 
in  1540. — There  is  a  French  version,  which  has  gone  through 
several  editions. 

Sir  P.  Rycaut,  The  present  State  of  the  Greek  and  Armenian 
Churches,  8^.  London,  1679.  See  also  his  '  History  of  the  pre- 
•  sent  State  of  the  Ottoman  Empire,'  8^.  London,  1675. 

his    History    of  the    Turkish  Empire,   from  1623    to 

1677,  folio,  London,  1680. 

History  of  the  Turks,  from  the  year  1679  ^o  1699, 

folio,  London,  1700. 

P.  Heylyn,  Microcosmus,  40.  1621.  1624.  Oxford,  1627. 

Cosmographie,  folio,  1665,  1677,  &c.] 


492  Not  the  same  Proof  for  one  as  the  other. 

CHAP,  had  it  not  been  for  the  doctrine  of  transubstantiation 

IX 

'      coming  up  in  the  church  of  Rome. 

Jhel  o'?^'        ^-  ^^  ^^  "^^  ^^'"®  ^^^^^  ^^^^^  custom,  of  giving  infants 
sties.  tlie   eucharist,  was  in   the  ancient   church   received 

either  so  early  or  so  generally,  as  baptism  of  them 
was.  I  have,  through  all  the  first  part,  shewn  the 
evidences  of  their  baptism  ;  but  for  their  receiving 
the  eucharist,  I  know  of  no  other  evidences  Avithin 
our  period  of  antiquity,  than  what  I  have  just  now 
recited.  Of  which,  St.  Cyprian  does  not  speak  of 
mere  infants  ;  and  the  other  two  are  dated  after  the 
year  of  Christ  412  ;  and  that  only  in  the  Latin 
church.  It  is  a  strong  presumption  that  therd  was 
loo.  no  use  of  it,  not  even  in  the  church  of  Carthage,  in 
Tertullian's  time ;  because  he,  who  lived  there,  and 
pleaded  to  have  the  custom  of  baptizing  infants  to 
be  set  aside,  (except  in  danger  of  death,)  could  not 
have  failed  to  have  given  his  opinion  much  rather 
against  the  admitting  them  to  that  other  sacrament, 
if  it  had  then  been  used. 

3.  The  grounds  of  these  two  practices  are  nothing 
of  equal  force.  The  words  of  our  Saviour  to  the 
Jews,  John  vi.  53,  by  which  Innocent  proves  the  one, 
do  no  way  appear  to  belong  to  the  sacramental  eat- 
ing, which  was  not  then  instituted.  But  his  words, 
John  iii.  5,  do  plainly  belong  to  the  other.  The 
passover,  which  answers  to  the  eucharist,  though 
enjoined  in  general  words  to  all,  yet  was  not  under- 
stood to  belong  to  the  youngest  infants.  Circumci- 
sion and  Jewish  baptism,  which  answer  to  Christian 
baptism,  were  given  to  infants  as  M^ell  as  adult. 
Baptism  has  in  Scripture  the  notion  and  character  of 
an  initiating  or  entering  sacrament.     The  eucharist 


Evidence  for  Infants'  Baptism.  493 

not  so.     Now   infants   are  by  the  express  words  of  chap. 
Scripture  to  be  initiated,  or  entered  into  covenant. 


Deut.  Xxix.   10,    11,    13.  Yea.- after 

tlie  apo- 

4.  However  it  be,  the  antipsedobaptists  cannot  ^^les. 
make  any  use  of  this  argument,  till  they  have 
granted  that  the  ancient  Christians  did  baptize  in- 
fants. So  long  as  many  of  them  endeavour  to  keep 
their  people  in  an  opinion  that  infants'  baptism  is  a 
new  thing,  so  long  they  will  forbear  to  tell  them 
that  infants  did  in  ancient  time  receive  the  eucha- 
rist :  since,  among  all  the  absurdities  that  ever  were 
held,  none  ever  maintained  that,  that  any  person 
should  partake  of  the  communion  before  he  was 
baptized.  And  if  the  people  among  them  shall  ever 
be  encouraged  to  search  into  the  history  of  the 
Church,  to  find  some  proofs  of  the  one,  they  will  at 
the  same  time  find  much  fuller  proofs  of  the  other, 
as  attested  by  much  ancienter  authors,  and  prac- 
tised more  universally  ;  and  that  when  one  was  left 
off  by  the  churches  that  began  it,  the  other  has 
been  still  continued  in  all  the  national  churches  in 
the  world. 


CHAP.  X. 


A    summing   up  of  the  Evidence  that  has  here  been   given 
on  hoth  sides. 

THOUGH  I  pretend  to  manage  the  part  of  a 
relater  of  the  passages  for  and  against  infant  bap- 
tism, rather  than  of  a  judge  of  the  force  and  con- 
sequence of  them,  yet  it  may  be  proper,  now  that 
I  have  produced  all  that  I  know  concerning  that 
matter  in  the  eldest  times,  to  sum  up  in  short,  for 


494  Evidence  for  Infants'  Baptism. 

the  use  of  the  rea( 
given  on  both  sides. 


CHAP,  the  use  of  the  reader,  the  evidence  that  has  been 


the  apo-  It  appears  on  one  side, 

sties.  ^  J    J    That  as  Abraham  was   taken  into  cove- 

nant by  circumcision,  an  ordinance  appointed  for 
him  and  all  the  male  infants  of  his  race,  to  enter 
them  into  covenant ;  so  when  God  did,  four  hun- 
dred and  thirty  years  after,  establish  anew  that 
covenant  with  that  nation  under  the  conduct  of 
Moses,  he  appointed  washing  %  which  is  in  the 
Greek  tongue  called  baptism,  to  be  another  ordi- 
nance of  entering  into  it.  And  that  the  Jews,  as 
they  reckoned  it  one  of  the  ceremonies,  whereby 
their  whole  nation,  infants  as  well  as  grown  persons, 
was  then  entered  into  covenant ;  so  when  they  pro- 
selyted or  discipled  any  person  of  the  nations,  they 
did  use  to  wash  or  baptize  him  ;  because  the  law 
had  said,  One  law  and  one  manner  shall  be  for 
you  and  for  the  stranger  [or  proselyte]  that  so- 
journeth  with  you  ^.  And  if  that  proselyte  had 
any  infant  children,  male  or  female,  they  baptized 
them,  as  well  as  the  parents  ;  and  they  counted  and 
called  them  proselytes  or  discipled  persons,  as  well 
as  they  did  the  parents.  A)  ;o,  that  if  they  bought, 
or  found,  or  took  in  war,  any  infants  whom  they 
intended  to  make  proselytes  or  disciples  in  their 
religion,  they  did  it  by  baptizing  them.  For  this, 
see  Introduction,  §.  1,  2,  3,  4,  ,5,  7. 

This  gives  light  for  the  understanding  of  our 
Saviour's  commission  &,  Go  and  disciple  all  nations, 
baptizing  them.  Whereas  before,  only  now  and 
then  one  out  of  the  neighbour  nations  had  been 
made  a  disciple  or  proselyte,  they  were  now  all  to 

e  Exod.  xix,  lo.  f  Numb.  xv.  i6.  g  Matt,  xxviii.  19. 


Evidence  for  Infants  Baptistn.  495 

be   discipled  :    and    (since    nothing    is    said    to    the  chap. 
contrary)  in  the  same  manner  as  those  before  had 


i  Year  after 

been.  t^g  -jpg. 

2.  That  the  Jews  did  nse  to  call  that  their  bap-^"^^^^* 
tism   by  the  name  of  regeneration,  or  a  ?ieiv  birth. 
They  told  the  proselytes,  that  how  unclean,  sinful, 

or  accursed  soever  he  or  his  children  were  before, 
they  were  now  by  this  baptism  dedicated  to  the 
true  God,  entered  into  a  new  covenant  with  him, 
put  into  a  new  state,  and  were  in  all  respects  as  if 
they  had  been  new  born.  Also,  that  the  heathens 
before  Christ's  time  had  a  custom  of  baptizing-,  and 
that  they  also  called  it  regeneration.  See  Introduc- 
tion, §.  6.  and  book,  part  i,  ch.  4.  ^.11. 

This  gives  light  to  our  Saviour's  expression, 
where  he,  after  the  Christian  baptism  now  brought 
into  use  by  John  Baptist  and  himself,  tells  Nico- 
demus '',  that  to  be  regenerated,  or  bor7i  again  of 
water  and  the  Spirit,  was  absolutely  necessary  for 
any  one's  coming  to  tJie  kingdom  of  God :  and  to 
St.  Paul's  styling  baptism  the  washing  of  regene- 
ratioti  *. 

3.  That  accordingly  all  the  ancient  Christians, 
not  one  man  excepted,  do  take  the  word  reqenera- 
tion,  or  new  birth,  to  signify  baptism  ;  and  regene- 
rate, baptized.  And  that  our  Saviour's  said  words 
to  Nicodemus  do  so  stand  in  the  original,  and  are 
so  understood  by  all  the  ancients,  as  to  include  all 
persons,  men,  women,  or  children ;  part  i.  ch.  2. 
§.  4,  5,  6.  ch.  iii.  §.  2,  3,  4,  5,  8.  ch.  iv.  j.  3,  6.  ch.  vi. 
§.  13.  ch.  xi.  '^.  2.  ch.  xii.  §.  8.  ch.  xiii.  §.  2.  and  all 
the  other  chapters. — part  ii.  ch.  vi.  «^.  1,  7.  And  that 
by  the  kingdom  of  God  there  is  meant  t/ie  kingdom 

^  John  iii.  3,  5.  >  Tit,  iii.  5. 


496  Evidence Jbr  Infants  Baptism. 

CHAP,   of  glory,  is  proved  from  the  plain  words  of  the  con- 
'       text,  and  from  the  sense  of  all  ancient  interpreters, 


Ihelfo'^'  part  ii.  ch.  6.  J.  1. 

sties.  4.    The    necessity    of   baptism    to    entrance    into 

intheapo-Q    pg  kinedom,  was  a   declared   Christian   doctrine 

sties   time.  o  ' 

before   St.  John   had  recorded   those   words   of  our 
Saviour,  part  i.  ch.  1.  ^.2,  3,  7. 

5.  Clement  in  the  apostles'  time,  and  Justin  Martyr 
about  forty  years  after,  do  s]3eak  of  original  sin  as 
affecting  infants,  part  i.  ch.  1.  '^.  1.  ch.  2.  §.  1.     And  ) 

4o-  Justin  Martyr  does  speak  of  baptism  as  being  to  us 
instead  of  circumcision,  part  i.  ch.  2.  §.  2.     So  also 
150-  does  St.  Cyprian,  part  i.  ch.  6^.  §.  1.  and  Nazianzen, 
290.  part  i.  ch.  xi.  §.  7.  and  St.  Basil,  ch.  xii.  ^.  5.  and 
St.  Chrysostom,   ch.  xiv.  ^.  1.   and  St.  Austin,  ibid, 
the    three    last    expressly    calling   it,    in    St.  Paul's 
phrase,  the   circumcision  made  without  hands :   and 
no-  St.  Cyprian,    the    '  spiritual    circumcision.'      Origen 
also  says  that  Christ  '  gives  us  circumcision  by  bap- 
'  tism.'  Homil.  5.  in  Jos. 
67-       6.  Irenseus,    born   about    the    time   of  St.  John's 
death,  and  probably  of  Christian  parents,  is  proved 
particularly  to  use   the  word  regenerati7ig  for  bap- 
tiziiig :  and  he  mentions  infants  as  being  ordinarily  1 

40.  regenerated,  ch.  iii.  §.  2,  3,  4,  5.    And  Justin  Martyr  / 

before  him  speaks  of  infants   or  children   as  being 
made  disciples  to  Christ,  part  i.  ch.  2.  §.  7. 

7.    Origen,    Ambrose,    and    Austin,    do    each    of 

them   expressly   affirm,    that   baptizing  infants  was 

ordered  by  the  apostles,  and  practised  in  their  time. 

9.1.  And    Clemens   Alexandrinus  plainly   intimates    the 

same  ;  part  i.  ch.  iii.  §.  9.  ch.  v.  f  3.  ch.  xiii.  §.  1. 

ixo.  ch.  XV.   sect.  4.   §.  3.  item  sect.  6.   f  2.     Of  these, 

296]  Origen  had  both  his  father  and  grandfather  Chris- 


Evidence  for  Infants'  Baptism.  497 

tians:  and  he  himself  was  bom  but  eighty-six  years   chap. 
after  the  apostles  ;  so  that  probably  his  grandfather       ^- 
was  born  within  the  apostles'  time  ;  or  at  least  very  ^'^^r  after 
nigh  it,  part  i.  ch.  5.  §.  9.      And  Clemens  Alexan- SL!'"" 
drinus  flourished  himself  within  ninety-two  years  of 
the  apostles. 

8.  Tertullian,  though  he  give  his  opinion  uncon-  .oo. 
stantly,  and  do  at  one  place  advise  the  delay  of 
infants'  baptism,  yet  at  the  same  place  speaks  of  it  as 
a  thing  customarily  received,  part  i.  ch.  4.  §.  3,  4,  5. 
9.  where  he  also  makes  baptism  absolutely  necessary 
to  salvation. 

9.   That   place    of  Scripture,  ]  Cor.  vii.  14,  Else 
were  your  children  unclean,  but  now  are  they  holy, 
[or  sanctified,]   is  interpreted  of  their  baptism  as 
then  given,  or  to  be  given   before  they  can  actually 
be  reckoned  holy;  by  Tertullian,  part  i.  ch.  4.  §.  12.   roo. 
St.  Hierome,  part  i.  ch.  18.  <^.  4.     Paulinus,  ibid.  378. 
St.  Austin,  part  i.  ch.  15.  sect.  2.     Pelagius,  ch.  xix.  293. 
f  19.     And  that  ayioi,  holy,  [or  saints,  or  sanctified,  296. 
or  Christians,]  is  as  much  as  to  say  baptized,  part  i.  305. 
ch.  11.  §.  11  ;  ch.  vi.  §.  1.     Origen  also  appears  so 
to  have  understood  it,  part  i.  ch.  I9.  ^.  I9.  No.  4. 

10.  In  St.  Cyprian's   time,  a  question  being   put   150 
among  sixty-six  bishops,  whether  an  infant  must  be 
kept  till  eight  days  old,  before  he  be  baptized ;  not 
one  was  of  that  opinion,  part  i.  ch.  vi.  §.  1.     And  to 
put   the  rest  together,  the  words  of  the  council  of 
Eliberis,  part  i.  ch.  7.     Of  Optatus,  ch.  ix.  f  2.     Of  205. 
Gregory    Nazianzen,    ch.  xi.  f  2.  4.  6,  7.      Of  St.  260. 
Ambrose,  ch.  xiii.  §.  1,  2.     Of  St.  Chrysostom,   ch.   '7^- 
xiv.  §.  1.  3.  5.     Of  St.  Hierome,  ch.  xv.  f  1  ;  ch.  xix.   '^°- 
f  26.     Of  St.  Austin,  ch.  xv.  per  totum.     Of  Boni-  \fi 
facius,  ibid.  sect.  5.  §.  4.     JNIore   of  St.  Austin,  ch. 

WALL,  VOL,   II.  IC  k 


498  Evidence  for  Infants  Baptism. 

CHAi'.   xix.  and  xx.  per  totiun.     Of  a  council   of  Carthage, 

ch.  xvi.  §.  3,  4,  5,  6.     Of  a  council  of  Hi])po,  ibid. 

the  apo-     ^-  5.     Of  Siricius,  ch.  xvii.  §.  3.  6.     Of  Innocentius, 
'"''■  .97.  cb-  xvii.  f  7,  8;  ch.  xix.  §.  28.      Of   Paulinus,  ch. 
284.  xviii.  ^.  1.  3.     Of  another  Paulinus,  ibid.  §.  6.      Of 
293-  Coelestius,  ch.  xix.  §.  5.  31.  35.  36.      Of   Pelagius, 
3??!  eh.  xix.  f  29,  30.     Of  Zosimus,  ibid.  §.  33.     Of  the 
316.  council  of  Milevis,  ibid.  ^.  28.     Of  another  council 
3 '7-  of  Carthage,  ibid.     And   of  another,  ch.  xix.  §.  37. 
31S.  Of  Vincentius  Victor,  ch.  xx.  J.  2,  3,  4,  5.     Of  Ju- 
320.  lian,  ch.  xix.  f  38.     Of  Theodorus,  ibid.  {.  39-     Of 
Pseudo-Clement,  ch.  xxiii.  ^.  1.     Of  Pseudo-Diony- 
sius,  ibid.  ^.  2.     Of  the  author  of  the  Qucestiones  ad 
Orthodocvos,  ibid.  ^.  3.     Of  the  author  of  the  Qucbs- 
tiones  ad  Antiochum,  ibid.      The  words  of  these,  and 
of  all  the  rest  here  cited,  do  shew  that  infants  were 
baptized  in  their  times :   and  that  without  contro- 
versy.    There  is  not  one  man  of  them  that  pleads 
for  it,  or  goes  about  to  prove  it,  as  a  thing  denied 
by  any  one:    save   that  the  Pseudo-Dionysius   an- 
swers the  objections  that  the  heathens  made  against 
it ;  which   are   much  the  same   that  the  antipcedo- 
baptists  have  made  since. 

11.  St.  Austin  mentions  it  amonof  the  thinsrs  that 
have  not  been  instituted  by  any  council,  but  have 
been  ever  in  use.  And  says,  '  The  whole  church  of 
'  Christ  has  constantly  held  that  infants  are  baptized 
*  for  forgiveness  of  sin.'  And,  that  '  he  never  read 
'  or  heard  of  any  Christian,  catholic  or  sectary,  that 
'  held  otherwise.'  And  expressly  says ;  '  That  no 
'  Christian  man  of  any  sort  [nullus  Christianoru7n] 
'  ever  denied  it  to  be  useful  or  necessary.'  Meaping 
of  those  that  allow  any  baptism  at  all,  part  i.  ch.  xv. 
sect.  4.  §.  3.  sect.  6.  §.  2 ;  ch.  xix.  ^.  7.  item  17- 


Evidence  for  Infmits'  Baptisni.  499 

12.  The  Pelagians,  who  denied  that  infants  have   chap. 
any  need  of  forgiveness  of  sin,  and  were  most  of  all 


pressed  with  that  argument,  '  AVhy  are  they  then  y*"**^  after 
'  baptized  V  did  never  offer  to  deny  that  they  are  to  sties. 
be  baptized  :  but  do  expressly  grant  that  they  have 
ever  been  wont  to  be  baptized  ;  and  that  no  Chris- 
tian, no  not  even  any  sectary,  did  ever  deny  it,  parti, 
ch.  xix.  §.  24.  26.  29,  30,  31,  32.  35,  &c.  ad  40. 
Part  ii.  ch.  4.  f  1.  3. 

13.  And  for  the  other  heretics  of   these  times ;  F'om  6o 

.     .  1  .       .       to  300. 

there  appears  not  (by  examninig  the  many  varieties 
of  opinions  that  they  held)  any  sign  that  any  of  them 
that  used  any  baptism  at  all,  denied  it  to  infants,  part 
i.  ch.  15.  sect.  4.  §.  4 ;  ch.  xvi.  ^.  1,  2 ;  ch.  xxi.  §.  1.  4. 

14.  It  is  held  by  all  these  ancient  Christians, 
that  no  children  dying  unbaptized  can  come  to  the 
kingdom  of  heaven,  part  i.  ch.  4.  '^.  3.  6,  7,  8 ;  ch.  vi. 
^.  9.  13,  14  ;  ch.  xi.  ^.  6,  7;  ch.  xii.  §.  5;  ch.  xiii. 
§.  2  ;  ch.  xiv.  i^.  2  ;  ch.  xv.  sect.  3.  ^.  2  ;  ch.  xvi. 
\.  3,  4,  5,  6  ;  ch.  xviii.  §.  4,  5  ;  ch.  xix.  f  24.  28; 
ch.  XX.  §.  6  ;  ch.  xxiii.  §.  3  ;  part  ii.  ch.  6.  §.  4,  5,  6. 
St.  Austin  in  the  last  of  these  places  says,  there 
was  in  this  matter  '  Christianorum  populorum  con- 
*  cordissima  tidei  conspiratio,'  the  most  uniform 
consent  of  all  Christian  people  [or  nations].  And 
that  the  Pelagians  themselves  were  overswayed  by 
it,  and  owned  it  to  be  true. 

Vincentius  Victor  was  the  only  man  that  is 
known  to  affirm  the  contrary.  He  maintained  once,  318. 
that  by  God's  extraordinary  mercy  and  the  prayers 
of  the  church  this  might  be  obtained  :  but  he  also 
recanted,  ch.  xx.  ^.  3,  4,  5 ;  yet  they  all  grant  that 
infants  so  dying  have  little  or  (as  some  say)  no 
punishment. 

K  k  2 


500  Evidence  for  Infants  Baptism. 

CHAP.        But  they  hold,  nemine  contradice^ite,  that  all  bap- 

tizecl  infants,  dying  in  infancy,  are  glorified,  part  i. 

thrapo.'*"^  ch.  6.  ^.  9;  ch.  xi.  §.  6,  7;  ch.  xv.  sect.  3.  §.  2. 

sties.  J^gj^  gg^l-^  ^    ^^  Q  .    p^j.j.  ••_  ^|j^  ^-^  ^^  Q 

15.  They  do  accordingly  speak  of  it  as  a  great 
sin  in  parents,  or  others  that  have  opportunity,  to 
suffer  any  child  under  their  care,  or  any  other  per- 
son, to  die  unbaptized,  part  i.  ch.  4.  §.  4  ;  ch.  vi. 
J.  1.  9  ;  ch.  XV.  §.  1  ;  ch.  xvii.  ^.  3  :  part  ii.  ch.  3. 
sect.  6.  §.  7.  And  they  represent  it  as  great  piety 
and  compassion  in  those  that  procure  an  infant  that 
has  been  exposed  in  the  streets  by  an  unnatural 
mother,  to  be  baptized,  part  ii.  ch.  6.  J.  9.  And 
when  for  the  more  orderly  administration  of  bap- 
tism they  enact  that  none  shall  be  baptized  but  at 
certain  times  of  the  year,  they  always  except  infants 
and  sickly  persons,  part  i.  ch.  xvii.  ^.  3.  for  which 
reason  also  many  of  them  allow  a  layman  to  baptize 
in  case  of  necessity,  part  i.  ch.  iv.  §.  4. 
loo.  ig.  They  shew  that  they  have  considered  those 
reasons  which  the  antipaedobaptists  do  now  make 
use  of,  as  objections  against  the  baptizing  of  in- 
fants :  as  that  they  have  no  sense,  no  faith,  no  actual 
sin,  &c.  and  yet  do  not  count  them  sufficient  reasons 
to  forbear  the  baptizing  them,  part  i.  ch.  14.  ^.  3  ; 
ch.  XV.  sect.  3  ;  item  sect.  v.  ^.  1.  4.  9  ;  ch.  xix.  1. 18. 
17-  The  use  of  godfathers  in  infants'  baptism  is 
proved  to  have  been  the  custom  of  the  Jews  in  bap- 
tizing the  infants  of  proselytes,  Introduction,  §.  3,  4. 
and  of  Christians  afterwards,  by  quotations  from 
the  year  after  the  apostles  100,  and  all  along  this 
period,  part  i.  ch.  4.  §.  9  ;  ch.  xv.  sect.  4.  J.  3 ;  item 
sect.  V.  §.  3,  4,  5  ;  ch.  xix.  J.  7;  ch.  xxii ;  ch.  xxiii. 
}.  2:  part  ii.  ch.  9.  ^.  9.  14. 


Evidence  for  Infants'  Baptism.  501 

18.  This  also  makes  one  evidence  ;  that  the  proofs  chap. 
which  some  of  the  antipeedobaptists  have,  after  their 


best  search,  pretended  to  bring  of  any  church  or  any  ^i^^^^fj,!^'^'^ 
sect  of  Christians  in  these  elder  times,  that  did  not^*'®**- 
baptize   infants,  are  fonnd  to   be   falsely  recited,  or 
mistaken,  or  not  to  the  purpose,  part  i.  ch.  15.  sect.  4. 
^.  3,  4  :    part  ii.   ch.  1.   §.  2,  3,  4,  5  ;    ch.  ii.   §.  15  ; 
ch.  iv.  §.  1,  2,  3. 

And  even  the  instances  of  particular  men,  whom 
they  would  prove  to  have  been  born  of  Christian 
parents,  and  yet  not  baptized  in  infancy,  do  all  (or  at 
least  all  but  one)  fail  of  any  tolerable  proof,  part  ii. 
ch.  3.  ]}er  totuni. 

19.  The  sense  of  all  modern  learned  men  that  do 
read  these  ancient  books,  except  those  few  specified, 
is,  that  these  books  do  give  clear  proof  that  infant- 
baptism  was  customary  in  the  times  of  those  au- 
thors, and  from  the  apostles'  time,  part  ii.  ch.  2. 
^.  1.  16.  There  are  but  three  or  four  that  think 
otherwise.  And  Menno  himself,  the  father  of  the 
present  antipsedobaptists,  granted  this  to  be  true, 
part  ii.  ch.  8.  §.  5. 

20.  Lastly,  as  these  evidences  are  for  the  first 
four  hundred  years,  in  which  there  appears  only 
one  man,  Tertullian,  that  advised  the  delay  of  in-  loo. 
fant-baptism  in  some  cases ;  and  one  Gregory,  that  230. 
did  perhaps  practise  such  delay  in  the  case  of  his 
children,  but  no  society  of  men  so  thinking,  or  so 
practising :  nor  no  one  man  saying  it  was  unlawful 

to  baptize   infants :  so   in   the   next  seven  hundred  to  looo. 
years,  there  is  not  so  much  as  one  man  to  be  found 
that  either   spoke  for,  or  practised,  any  such  delay. 
But    all    the    contrary,    part  i.    ch.  22.    per    totum ; 
part  ii.  ch.  7.  §.1. 


502  Evidence  against  Infant-Baptism. 

CHAP.       And  when  about  the  year  1130,  one  sect  among 

—     ...  the   Albigenses    declared    against   the    baptizing    of 

Srap^f-^'  infants,   as  being  incapable   of  salvation,   the   main 

sties.         body  of  that  people  rejected  that  their  opinion ;  and 

they  of  them  that  held  that  opinion  quickly  dwindled 

away,  and  disappeared  ;  there  being  no  more  heard 

of  holding  that  tenet,  till  the  rising  of  the  German 

1422.  antipaedobaptists,   anno    1522,   part  ii.  ch.    7.   §•   2, 

3,  4,  &c. 

And  that  all  the  national  churches  now  in  the 
world  do  profess  and  practise  infant-baptism,  part  ii. 
ch.  8.  f  1,  2,  3. 

II.  The  reasons  and  evidences  for  the  other  side 
ought  to  be  divided  into  two  sorts.  For  there  are 
some  of  them,  which  really  have  all  the  force  that 
they  seem  to  have ;  but  some  others  of  them  must 
indeed  pass  for  reasons,  or  for  good  evidence,  to  one 
that  understands  only  the  vulgar  translation  of  the 
Scripture,  and  only  the  present  state  of  the  nations 
of  the  world,  and  of  religion  :  but  do  lose  their 
force,  when  one  searches  into  the  originals  of  the 
Scripture,  or  when  one  comprehends  the  history  of 
the  state  of  religion  in  the  world,  at  that  time 
when  the  books  of  the  New  Testament,  or  the 
books  of  the  ancient  Christians  were  written. 

I  will  first  sum  up  that  evidence  which  I  take  to 
be  of  the  first  sort. 

1,  It  does  not  appear  that  the  Jewish  baptism  of 
infants  in  our  Saviour's  time  (according  to  which 
the  ))8edobaptists  suppose  the  apostles  were  to  regu- 
late theirs,  in  all  things  not  otherwise  directed  by 
our  Saviour)  was  in  all  respects  like  to  that  which 
the  Christian  paedobaptists  do  practise.  For  the 
Jews  seem    to   have   baptized    the  infants    of  such 


Evidence  against  Infant-Baptism.  503 

only  as   were  proselyted,  or   marie   disciples   out   of  chap. 

the    heathen    nations,    and    infants    taken    in    war, !___ 

found,    bought,    &c.      But    not    their    own    infants.  \''^'" '*^"^^'' 

'  o       '  the  apo- 

They  thought  their  own  infants  to  be  clean  without  sties. 
it ;  clean  by  their  birth,  being-  of  a  nation  which  had 
been  once  universally  sanctified  by  baptism.     Intro- 
duction, p.  3. 

This,  supposing  it  to  have  some  weight  against 
infant-baptism,  as  the  Christians  do  practise  it ;  yet 
does  not  make  for  the  antipa^dobaptists'  practice 
neither.  For  they  (as  well  as  the  paedobaptists) 
do  hold  that  all  persons  are  now  to  be  baptized  at 
some  age  or  other  (persons  born  of  Christian  parents, 
as  well  as  those  that  are  born  of  heathens.)  Which 
being  granted,  the  example  of  the  Jewish  baptism 
directs  it  to  be  done  in  infancy  :  for  all  whom  the 
Jews  baptized  at  all,  they  baptized  in  infancy,  if 
they  had  then  the  power  of  them.  And  besides,  the 
exception  of  Jews  or  Jews'  children  from  the  obli- 
gation to  baptism,  was  understood  by  themselves  to 
be  a  thing  that  was  to  continue  only  till  the  coming 
of  the  Christ,  or  of  the  Elias,  Introduction,  §.  3,  5> 
et  ult.  Since  which  time  the  Jews  are,  as  to  matter 
of  baptism,  brought  to  the  same  state  as  Gentiles. 
Which  does  take  off  all  the  force  of  this  reason  or 
evidence. 

2.  As  to  the  argument  taken  from  the  practice  of 
the  ancient  Christians,  considered  in  general ;  it  is 
some  weakening  of  the  force  of  it,  that  some  of 
those  ancients  who  baptized  infants,  did  also  give 
them  the  communion  :  some,  I  say,  but  not  very 
many ;  and  those,  none  of  the  most  ancient,  part  ii. 
ch.  9.  \.  15,  16,  17.  Now  though  a  man's  error  in 
one  thing  does  not  necessarily  prove  that  he  errs  in 


504  EciiirHce  aaaihst  Infant-Baj>Hsm. 

CHAP,  another :  vet  when  it  is  in  relation  to  the  same  sub- 

,ieot.  It  gives  some  abatement  to  his  authority.     And 

Yesraftn-  thouofh  it   be  to  this  dav  controverted  between  the 

tbeapo- 

»d«.  eastern  and  western  Christians,  whether  this  be  an 
error,  or  not :  yet  the  p^dobaptists  of  these  parts  of 
the  worki  must,  in  their  pleas  against  the  autip^- 
dobaptists.  yield  it  to  be  an  error  :  because  they 
themselves  do  not  use  it.  And  so  it  is  (for  as  far  as 
its  force  reaches)  ar(fumentum  ad  hominem  at  least. 

3.  As  to  particular  men  among  the  ancients; 
IOC.  Tertnllian  advises  the  delay  of  infent-baptism  (in 
ordinary  cases  where  there  is  no  apparent  danger 
of  death)  till  they  come  to  the  age  of  understand- 
ing: and  then  further,  till  they  are  married,  or 
else  by  their  age  are  past  the  dano^er  of  lust,  part  i. 
ch.  iv.  0.  1,  4,  5.  6,  7,  8. 

As  for  any  value  that  is  to  be  put  upon  Tertul- 
lian's  judgment  or  opinion,  as  a  single  man,  I  ought 
to  have  put  this  among  the  second  sort  of  evidence, 
wliich  is  of  little  or  no  force  with  such  as  do  under- 
stand the  history  of  that  time :  because  all  that  do 
so,  do  know  that  he  was  accounted  (both  in  his  own 
time,  and  also  by  those  who  after  his  death  spoke  of 
him  or  his  works)  a  man  of  odd.  rash,  singular,  and 
heterodox  tenets  in  many  other  things  :  and  that  in 
the  latter  part  of  his  life  he  tnmed  (as  men  of  that 
temper  commonly  do)  a  downright  heretic  in  some 
fundamental  points  of  the  faith,  part  i.  ch.  4.  0.  1, 
13.  So  that  his  opinion  or  judgment  was  never 
esteemed  of  any  value. 

And  for  his  testimony  as  a  witness  of  the  then 
practice,  his  speaking  against  infant-baptism  is  as 
good  evidence  that  it  was  then  customary,  as  theirs 
that  mention  it  with  approbation. 


apo- 
stles. 


lO. 


Emdence  against  Infant-Bajptism.  505 

But  this  I  think  has  some  weight :  that  if  Ter-  t;HAP, 

X. 

tulHaii   had   known   of  any  such   tradition  or  order . 

left  'by  the  apostles,'  as  Origen  who  lived  at  thethrar'^*" 
same  time  speaks  of,  to  baptize  infants ;  he,  as 
heady  as  he  was,  would  not  then  have  spoken 
against  the  doing  of  it.  Especially  if  the  book 
where  he  does  this,  Mas  written  ( as  Dr.  Allix 
Judges  it  was)  while  he  continued  in  the  catholic 
church. 

This  therefore  may  be  concluded,  that  either 
there  was  no  good  account  of  such  a  tradition,  or 
else  that  Tertullian  had  never  heard  of  it.  AVhich 
last  is  not  at  all  improbable :  for  Origen,  living 
most  of  his  time  in  Palestine,  w^here  the  apostles 
had  much  and  long  conversed,  and  being  born  of 
Christian  ancestors  in  vEgypt  not  far  off,  might 
very  well  have  good  proof  of  an  order  left  by 
the  apostles,  and  sure  footsteps  of  their  practice ; 
of  wdiich  Tertullian,  born  of  heathen  parents,  and 
living  at  Carthage,  (a  place  where  no  apostle  ever 
came,  nor  nigh  it  by  a  great  distance,)  might  at 
that  time  have  heard  nothing. 

However  it  be,  the  antipaedobaptists  must  make 
much  of  this  man.  For  he  is  the  only  one  of 
all  the  ancients  that  had  this  opinion.  So  says 
Mr.  Du  Pin"^,  who  has  with  the  greatest  accuracy 
searched  their  works,  and  with  the  greatest  fidelity 
reported  them  :  he,  in  reciting  this  passage  of 
Tertullian,  observes ;  '  one  finds  no  other  writer 
'  in  all  antiquity  tliat  speaks  at  this  rate.'  And 
so  the  Magdeburgenses^ ;  Tertullian  '  by  a  strange 
'  opinion  holds,'  &c. 

k  Bibliotheque  Nouvelle,  vol.  i.  de  TertuUiano. 
'  Cent.  3,  cap.  4.  luclinatio  Doctriuse  de  Baptisnio. 


225- 


506  Evidence  against  Infant -Baptism. 

CHAP.        4.    But    though    there    be    never    another    that 

X 

'  advises  such  a  delay  of  baptism,  yet  there  is  a 
J^g^^^Jf''  probability  that  one  that  lived  about  one  hundred 
sties.  and  thirty  years  after  that  time,  in  another  part  of 
the  world,  practised  such  a  delay :  viz.  Gregory  the 
father  of  Greoforv  Nazianzen.  He  seems  to  have 
suffered  all  his  children,  even  those  that  were 
born  to  him  after  his  baptism,  to  grow  up  to  a 
full  age  without  baptizing  them.  This  matter  of 
fact  is  discussed  with  the  evidence  pro  and  contra^ 
part  ii.  ch.  iii.  sect.  6.  •^.  3, 4,  5,  6, 7- 

As  Tertullian's  character  was,  that  he  was  learned 
and  ingenious,  but  hot  and  heady:  so  this  man  seems 
on  the  other  side  to  have  been  ignorant,  and  of  mean 
capacities.  Only  his  son  indeed  does,  as  duty  required, 
speak  honourably  of  him. 

If  he  had  been  a  man  much  spoken  of,  it  would 
have  made  a  better  argument  (than  his  jjractice  now 
does)  that  leaving  children  unbaptized  was  no  unusual 
thing,  because  his  doing  so  is  not  mentioned  with 
any  censure  or  M'onder  by  any  author  of  that  time. 
But  as  he  was  a  man  little  regarded,  and  placed  in 
an  obscure  and  remote  corner,  and  never  mentioned 
but  only  by  the  writers  of  his  son's  life,  (who  lived 
six  hundred  years  after,)  this  cannot  be  expected. 
There  is  in  elder  times  no  mention  of  his  name  at 
all,  but  what  we  have  from  his  son :  and  had  it  not 
been  for  him,  it  would  not  have  been  known  that 
such  a  place  as  Nazianzum,  or  such  a  bishop  of  it 
as  this  elder  Gregory,  had  ever  been.  And  it  was 
not  for  the  son  to  reflect  on  any  faults  or  neglects  of 
his  father.  He  does  do  that,  as  far  as  could  be 
seemly  for  him,  when  he  admonishes  his  people 
against  any   such    neglect.     Of  which   admonitions 


Evidence  against  Infant -Baptism.  507 

of   bis    I    give    several    instances   in    parti,   cli.  xi.  chap. 
J.  2,  4,  6,  7.     In  one  of  them  indeed  he   does  (per- 


Year  after 


apo- 


haps  out  of  some  compliance  to  his  father's  practice)  ^^^ 
advise,  that  if  there  appear  no  danger  of  the  child's s^'^s- 
death,  the  baptism  should  be  delayed  till  he  be 
about  three  years  old.  But  that  helps  this  cause 
but  little :  both  because  a  child  at  three  years  old  is 
as  incapable  of  receiving  baptism  upon  his  personal 
profession  as  a  mere  infant :  and  also  because  he  at 
other  places  urges  the  speedy  administering  of  it  in 
general ;  and  so  he  does  at  this  place,  if  any  danger 
of  death  do  appear. 

This  evidence  therefore  of  Gregory's  father,  as  I 
would  not  omit  it  (let  it  have  what  weight  it  will 
bear) ;  so  I  cannot  reckon  it  to  have  any  great  force, 
being  but  one  man's  practice,  and  that  of  a  man  of 
little  judgment  or  credit. 

5.  That  argument  for  the  universal  consent  of 
antiquity  in  baptizing  infants,  which  is  taken  from 
the  declaration  of  St.  Austin  [that  he  never  read 
or  heard  of  any  Christian,  catholic,  or  sectary,  that 
denied  that  infants  are  baptized  for  forgiveness  of 
sin]  and  from  the  grant  of  Pelagius  [that  he  also  316. 
never  heard  of  any  that  denied  that  they  are  to 
be  baptized]  : — that  argument,  I  say,  is  something 
weakened  by  this ;  that  TertuUian,  two  hundred  joo. 
years  before  their  time,  is  found  to  have  spoken 
against  it ;  at  least  as  ordinarily  practised  :  so  that 
from  henceforward  that  rule  must  proceed  with  an 
exception  of  one  man,  viz.  TertuUian. 

6.  The   Petrobrusians,   one   of  those   societies   of 
men  called  Albigenses,  withdrawing  themselves  about 
the  year  1100  from  the  communion  of  the  church   looo 
of  Rome,  which  was  then  very  corrupt,  did  reckon 


508  Evidence  that  seems 

CHAP.'  infaDt-baptism  as  one  of  the  corruptions  ;  and  accord- 
ingly renounced  it,  and  practised  only  adult-baptism. 


sties.  An  exception  that  abates  in  great  measure  the 

force  of  the  evidence  from  these  men's  practice, 
is  this  ;  that  (besides  that  they  were  very  late 
and  very  few)  they  did  what  they  did  on  this 
principle  ;  that  no  infant,  baptized  or  not,  can 
come  to  heaven ;  which  is  by  both  the  parties  now 
acknowledofed  to  be  a  e'reat  and  an  uncharitable 
error. 

These  evidences,  how  much  or  how  little  soever 
they  weigh,  or  avail  toward  the  determining  the 
point,  are  however  to  be  reckoned  among  true  ones : 
that  is,  they  are  true,  and  not  mistaken  matters  of 
fact. 

III.  But  there  is,  as  I  said,  another  sort  of 
evidences  and  reasons  against  infant-baptism,  which 
are  apt  to  weigh  much  with  one  that  understands 
not  the  state  of  the  times  spoken  of,  and  can  read 
only  tlie  vulgar  translation  of  the  Scripture ;  and 
such  a  man  cannot  much  be  blamed  for  taking 
them  as  good  reason  or  evidence :  but  they  lose 
their  force  with  any  one  that  is  not  under  those 
disadvantaofes.    And  such  I  reckon  these  folio  wins:  * 

1.  There  are  several  ancient  books  that  say  nothing 
at  all  about  infant-ba]itisra,  neither  for  it  nor  against 
it.  And  it  is  \vonder,  say  some  antipsedobaptists,  if 
it  were  common  in  those  times,  that  these  as  well 
as  others  should  not  mention  it. 

A  ])onipous  recital  of  the  names  of  these  makes 
an  unlearned  antipoedobaptist  think  that  they  are 
so  many  authors  on  his  side.  But  any  one  that 
understands  how  the  ancient  Christian  writers  were 


against  Infant-Baptism.  509 

mostly  employed,  viz.   in   defending  the   truth   and   chap. 
innocence  of  their   religion    against   the   objections         ' 
and  slanders  of  heathens  and  Jews ;  in  encourao-ino-  Y'^^'"  ^^"^'' 

'  ft      o  the  apo- 

the  persecuted  people  to  bear  with  faith  and  pa-'*'!'^*- 
tience  the  obloquy  and  sufferings  they  lay  under, 
&c. ;  such  a  man,  instead  of  wondering  that  there 
are  no  more,  will  wonder  there  are  so  many,  that 
do  happen  in  such  their  writings  to  mention  so  par- 
ticular a  thing  as  the  baptizing  of  children.  Espe- 
cially since  in  the  primitive  times  there  was  no  con- 
troversy started  about  that  point.  Now  that  it  is 
become  a  controversy;  yet  let  any  man  go  into  a 
bookseller's  shop,  and  take  down  ten  books  at  all  ad- 
ventures ;  and  he  will  find  above  half  of  them  to  be 
such  as  have  no  mention  pro  nor  contra  about  infant- 
baptism  ;  because  they  are  written  on  such  subjects 
as  give  no  occasion  for  it.  It  is  the  nature  of  a  man 
whose  head  is  hot  with  any  controversy,  to  wonder 
he  does  not  find  something  about  that  in  every  book 
and  chapter  he  reads. 

Mr.  Tombes  made  a  plea  of  this.  But  he  was  too 
candid  a  disputant  to  lay  much  stress  on  it.  He 
takes  notice  of  five  authors  that  have  nothing  about 
it.  Mr.  Stennet  takes  two  of  his,  and™  reckons  up 
six  more,  who,  he  says,  have  nothing  of  it.  I  gave 
reasons,  I  hope,  satisfactory  enough,  why  in  Mr. 
Tombes'  authors  no  mention  of  such  a  thing  could 
be  expected,  part  i.  ch.  21.  §.  4,  5.  And  the  same 
are  applicable  to  those  produced  by  Mr.  Stennet ; 
save  that  he  reckons  Irenaeus  for  one;  who,  as  I 
shew,  part  i.  ch.  3.  speaks  plainly  enough  of  it. 
And  also  I  have  shewn,  part  i.  ch.  1  and  2.  that 
three  more  of  them,  Clemens  Romanus,  Hermas,  and 
HI  Answer  to  Russen,  p.  68. 


510  Evidence  that  seems  to  make  against 

CHAP.  Justin  Martyr,  though  not  speaking  directly  of  it, 
do  mention  things  from  whence  inferences  may  be 


Year  after 


thrapo-     (Jrawn  for  the  proof  of  it.     And  have  now  also  pro- 
sties,  duced   one    from    another    of  them  :    viz.   Clemens 
Alexandrinus. 

The  very  same  remark,  I  think,  ought  to  be 
made  u])on  that  objection  against  infant-baptism 
which  the  antipsedobaptists  do  much  insist  on ;  viz. 
that  St.  Luke,  in  reciting  the  lives  and  acts  of  the 
apostles,  does  not  mention  any  infants  baptized  by 
them.  Whoever  observes  the  tenor  of  that  history, 
and  considers  the  state  of  those  times,  will  perceive 
that  St.  Luke's  aim  is  to  give  a  summary  account  of 
the  main  and  principal  passages  of  their  lives  ;  and 
of  those  passages  especially,  in  which  they  found  the 
greatest  opposition.  And  in  such  a  history,  (which 
is  but  short  in  all,)  who  can  look  for  an  account  of 
what  children  they  baptized  ?  Su])pose  that  the  life 
and  actions  of  some  renowned  and  laborious  modern 
bishop  or  doctor  were  to  be  written  (say  of  bishop 
Ussher,  Stillingfleet,  &c.),  and  that,  in  a  volume  ten 
times  as  long  as  the  book  of  the  Acts  of  the  Apo- 
stles :  who  will  expect  to  find  there  any  account  of 
what  children  they  christened  ?  And  yet  there  is  no 
doubt  but  they  did  christen  hundreds,  or  (if  we  take 
in  what  was  done  by  ministers  deputed  by  them) 
thousands.  The  main  business  of  an  apostle  was  to 
preach,  convert,  attest  the  truth  of  Christ's  resur- 
rection, miracles,  &c. ;  and  not  to  baptize^  as  St. 
Paul  says".  The  baptizing  of  such  as  the  apostles 
had  convinced,  and  especially  of  their  children, 
would  of  course  be  left  to  deputies.  Yet  of  the  six 
baptisms  (which  are  all  that  St.  Paul  is  mentioned 

11  2  Cor.  i.  17. 


Infant-Baptism,  hit  does  not  really.  511 

to  have  been  concerned  in),  three  were  the  baptisms  chap. 
of  whole  households*':   such   an    one   and   all  Ms. 


And  that  is  as  much  as  can  reasonably  be  expected  Y*"^'"  ^^'*"' 

•'  ^  the  apo- 

of  SO  minute  a  circumstance.  sties. 

2.  Ireufieus,  who  is  the  eldest  of  the  Fathers  in  67. 
whom  the  pa^dobaptists  have  as  yet  found  any  posi- 
tive mention  of  infants  as  baptized,  does  not  at  that 
place    use   the  word  itself  baptized,  but   the  word 
regenerated  or  born  again,  part  i.  ch.  3.  ^.  2. 

This  may  invalidate  his  testimony  with  one  that 
knows  of  no  other  sense  of  that  word  than  what  is 
common  in  modern  English  books.  But  any  man 
that  has  been  at  all  conversant  in  the  Fathers,  or 
that  has  read  but  those  passages  of  them  that  are  in 
this  my  collection,  or  but  even  those  to  which  I 
referred  just  now  at  No.  3,  and  No.  5,  of  the  Evi- 
dences for  Infant-baptism  ;  will  be  satisfied  that  they 
as  constantly  meant  baptized  by  the  word  regene- 
rated, [or  born  again,'\  as  we  do  mean  the  same  by 
the  word  cJiristefied. 

To  be  satisfied  of  this  (and  I  do  assure  any  one 
that  will  search,  that  he  shall  not  miss  of  satisfac- 
tion) is  very  well  worth  a  paedobaptist's  while.  For 
the  testimonies  of  Irenseus  and  of  Justin  Martyr,  so 
near  the  times  of  the  apostles,  are  preferable  for 
their  antiquity  to  the  testimony  of  any  three  or  four 
others. 

3.  St.  Basil   in    a  certain    sermon    speaks    so    as  260. 
plainly  to  suppose  that  a  great  part  of  his  auditory 
was  made  up  of  such  as  had  been  instructed  in  the 
Christian  religion   from   their  infancy,  and  yet  not 
baptized,  part  i.  ch.  12.  ^.  2,  3. 

I  have  reason  to  reckon  this  among  the  evidences 

o  Acts  xvi.  15,  35.    I  Cor.  i.  i6. 


512  Evidence  that  seems  to  make  against 

CHAP,  that  may  appear  to  people  of  little  reading,  and  to 
__!___  such  as  have  but  a  shallow  and  superficial  know- 
Year  after  lefjpne  of  the  state  of  the  ancient  times,  to  have  a 

the  apo-  " 

sties.  great  weight  against  the  belief  of  any  general  prac- 

tice of  infants'  baptism  at  that  time  ;  because  it  had 
such  an  effect  upon  myself.  I  thought,  upon  the 
first  reading  of  this  place,  nothing  could  be  a  plainer 
proof  that  the  Christians  then  did  not  commonly 
baptize  their  children  in  infancy,  than  this  evi- 
dence of  a  church  full  of  people ;  a  considerable 
part  of  whom  had  been  catechised  from  their  in- 
fancy, and  were  not  yet  baptized.  Such  a  number 
of  heathen  converts  had  been  easily  to  be  accounted 
for :  but  these  seemed  born  of  Christian  parents, 
because  he  says,  '  From  a  child  catechised  in  the 
*  word.' 

But  all  this  argument  lost  its  force  with  me, 
when  by  further  reading  I  perceived  (and  wondered 
at  myself  afterward,  as  is  common,  why  I  had  not 
perceived  before)  that  which  I  shew  in  the  same 
chapter,  and  also  part  ii.  ch.  3.  sect.  1.  to  have  been 
the  state  of  the  world  as  to  religion  at  that  time : 
viz.  that  beside  those  that  were  heathens  on  one 
side,  and  those  that  were  professed  or  baptized 
Christians  on  the  other,  there  was  a  vast  number  of 
a  middle  sort :  half  converts,  heathen  men  converted 
thus  far,  that  they  were  convinced  that  Christianity 
was  the  true  religion,  and  that  they  must  be  bap- 
tized into  it  some  time  or  other :  but  not  being 
willing  as  yet  to  abandon  their  lusts,  they  put  it  off 
from  time  to  time.  These  men  did,  as  many  wicked 
men  do  now,  instruct  their  children  in  the  godly 
precepts  of  religion ;  but  they  could  not  offer  them 
to  baptism  till  they  were  baptized  themselves.    And 


Infant-baptism,  hut  does  not  really.  513 

those  that  St.  Basil  speaks  to,  had  been  the  children   chap. 
of  such  men.  — ^ , 

We  see  a  woful  example  in  our  churches  of  a  ^^^^"^  ^^'^^'^ 
much  like  nature.  jSIany  wicked  men  do  at  times  ^ties. 
resolve  to  become  serious  some  time  or  other :  and 
then  they  think  they  will  come  to  the  holy  commu- 
nion, and  engage  themselves  to  a  godly  life.  They 
put  off  this  from  time  to  time,  many  times  till 
death  seizes  them.  These  men,  if  they  had  been 
born  of  heathens,  and  not  yet  baptized,  but  yet  had 
come  to  the  knowledge  of  Christianity,  would  put 
off  their  baptism  as  they  now  do  the  other  sacra- 
ment ;  much  at  the  rate  as  the  fathers  of  those  to 
whom  St.  Basil  preaches  had  done  their  baptism, 
and  as  he  complains  the  sons  also,  to  whom  he 
preaches,  did.  And  as  we  see  now,  that  nigh  half 
the  world  of  nominal  Christians  are  such  procrasti- 
nators ;  so  there  seems  to  have  been  not  a  much  less 
proportion  among  the  catechumens  then.  And  as 
the  Fathers  do  speak  of  those  who  were  during  this 
dilatory  course  seized  with  death,  as  lost  men  ;  so  I 
doubt  it  is  but  poor  comfort  that  we  can  give  to 
men  so  seized,  that  have  for  like  reasons  all  their 
life  long  put  off  the  receiving  the  communion  ;  viz. 
because  they  would  not  yet  repent. 

But  still  this  state  of  religion  in  St.  Basil's  time 
does  not  prove,  that  any  who  were  once  baptized 
themselves,  did  delay  or  put  off  the  baptizing  of 
their  children. 

4.  Some  arguments  against  infants'  baptism  have 
all  their  strength  from  that  imperfect  conception  of 
things,  which  arises  from  one's  reading  only  the 
vulgar  translations  of  Scripture,  and  do  vanish 
when  one  consults  the  originals.     That  commission 

WALL,  VOL.  II.  L  1 


51 4  Evidence  that  seetns  to  make  against 


CHAP,  of  our  Saviour   to    the   apostles,    Matt,  xxviii.  19, 
which  is  in  the  English,  Go — aiid  teach  all  nations ; 
Ihel^o-^^  bfipti^ing    them,     &c. — teachinc)     them     to     observe. 


X. 

Year  after 
the  apo- 
stles. &e.    as    it    affords    on    one  side   this    argument  for 

paedobaptism ;  '  infants  are  part  of  the  nations ; 
'  and  so  to  be  baptized  by  this  commission  :'  so  on 
the  other  side  it  gives  occasion  to  the  antipsedobap- 
tists  to  retort,  and  say  ;  '  infants  are  such  a  part  of 
'  the  nation  as  are  not  capable  of  being  taught ;  and 
*  so  not  to  be  baptized.' 

But  the  word  which   is   translated   teach,  in  the 
first  of  those  clauses,  has  a  peculiar  signification  in 
the  original,   and    is    not   the   same    word    as    that 
which   is   translated   teaching,   in   the  second  i' :  but 
signifies  much    like    what    we    say    in    English;  to 
enter  any  oneh  name  as  a  scholar,  disciple,  or  pro- 
selyte, to  such  a  master,  school,  or  profession.     Now 
the  common  language  of  the   Jews,  (in  which  lan- 
guage it  was  that  St.  Matthew  wrote  his  Gospel,)  as 
it    does    not    admit    of  this    phrase,    an    infant    is 
taught,    or   instructed;    so    it    very    well    allows    of 
this   other ;   such  or   such    an  infant   is   entered   a 
disciple,  or  ?nade  a  proselyte  to  such  a  profession  or 
religion.     And  the  Jews  did  commonly  call  a  hea- 
then  man's  infant,   whom  they  had  taken  and  cir- 
cumcised  and    baptized,    a  young  proselyte;    as    I 
shewed  in  the  introduction.     And  St.  Peter,  speak- 
ing against  the  imposing  of  circumcision  on  the  hea- 
then converts  and  their  children,  words  it  thus ;  to 
put  a  yoke  upon  the  neck  of  the  disciples :  whereas 
it  was  infants  especially,  on  whom  this  yoke  was  at- 
tempted to  be  put,  Acts  XV.  10.     And  St.  Justin,  as 

P  [In  the  first  clause  we  read  nadrjreva-aTf ,  in  the  second  8i8d(T- 
Kovret.^ 


Yo;ir  after 


apo- 


Infant-haptism,  bid  does  not  really.  515 

I   shewed   in   the  first   part,  chap.  ii.  *^.  6,  expressly   chap. 
mentions  infants,  or  at  least  children,  as  7nade  dis- 
ciples, in   the  very  same  word   that   is   used   by  St.  j^^t 
Matthew  in   that  place.     And   when  he  speaks  of**''*'**- 
people    baptized   in    the   name   of  Christy   uses  the 
same  word;  inaOtjTevoiuevoi  elg  to  ovofxa  rod  ^picrrov.   As 

in  his  Diulocf.  p.  57.  ed.  Steph^.  He  says  ;  '  God 
'  has  not  hitherto  brought  on,  nor  does  yet  bring 
'  on,  the  day  of  judgment ;  yivooa-Kcov  en  KaO"  tjfjiepav  n- 
'  va?  juaOtjTevo/uei'oiK?  eis  to  ovofia  too  2i.pi<TTOv  avTOu. 
'  Knowing  "  that  there  are  still  every  day  some"  dis- 
'  cipled  into  the  name  of  his  Christ,  "  and  withdrawn 
'  from  the  way  of  error."  Where  that  he  by  "  dis- 
'  cipled  in  the  name  of  Christ,"  means,  "  baptized  in 
'  his  name,"  is  apparent  by  the  next  words,  which 
'  are ;  JV/io  do  also  receive  gifts,  emry  one  as  he  is 
'  worthy,  nihen  they  are  enlightened  [or  bajitized, 
*  (^(3dTLCpfxevoi\  in  the  name  of  this  Christ.  For  one 
'  receives  the  spirit  of  iinderstanding ;  another  of 
'  counsel ;  another  of  strength  ;  another  of  healing ; 
'  another  of  foreknowing,  [or  foretelling  things, 
'  ITiooyi/wcrea)?]'  &c.  These  and  such  like  gifts  of  the 
Spirit  did,  it  seems,  continue  in  his  time  to  be  given 
to  Christians  at  their  ba])tism. 

And  whereas  the  main  objection  against  this 
sense  of  the  word  fjLaOrjri]^  and  /ui.a6t]reue(T6ai  in  the 
case  of  infants,  that  they  should  be  understood  to  be 
discipled  to  Christ  by  baptism  before  any  actual 
teaching  of  them,  is,  that  that  word  is  seldom  (the 
objectors  say,  never)  used  without  including  present 
actual  teaching  in  its  signification. 

It  is  true  that  it  is  far  oftener  used  in  the  case  of 

^  [Dialogus  cum  Tiyphone  Judseo,  sect.  39.  p.  136.  edit. 
Benedict.] 

l1  2 


516  Evidence  that  seems  to  male  apainst 

CHAP,   such  as  do  at  that   time   learn,  or  have  learned,  or 

X. 

been  taught :  and  so  are  all  words  like  or  parallel  to 

tiiTl''^^^'  it:  as  when  we   say,  Such  a  master's  scholar,  pupil, 
sties.  servant,  apprentice,  &c. ;    such   a    captain's    soldier, 

&c. ;  these  words  are  far  oftener  used  in  the  case 
of  present  learning,  serving,  bearing  arms,  &c.,  be- 
cause there  is  oftener  occasion  to  speak  of  them  in 
that  state.  But  yet  it  is  truly  and  properly  said  of 
any  lad,  that  he  is  such  a  man's  pupil  or  scholar,  as 
soon  as  he  is  entered  and  consigned  to  learn  of  him, 
though  he  has  not  yet  begun :  such  a  master's  ser- 
vant or  apprentice,  as  soon  as  he  is  bound  to  him ; 
though  he  does  not  yet  practise  or  learn  any  part  of 
his  trade,  or  do  any  service :  such  a  captain's  soldier, 
as  soon  as  he  is  listed  ;  though  he  does  not  yet  bear 
arms. 

In  like  manner  the  word  naQriTh?  XpiarTov,  '  a  dis- 
*  ciple  of  Christ,'  is  far  oftener  used  in  the  case  of 
such  as  have  already  begun  to  learn  and  practise  his 
religion :  because  there  is  oftener  occasion  in  books 
to  speak  of  something  which  they  do  or  say,  or 
which  happens  to  them  during  the  time  of  their 
discipleship,  than  there  is  of  that  first  act  of  their 
entering :  but  it  may  truly  and  properly  be  used 
concerning  one  that  is  now  dedicated,  consigned, 
agreed,  and  entered  to  learn  and  practise  it,  though 
he  has  not  yet  begun.  And  it  is  so  used  when  there 
is  occasion  to  sj)eak  of  such  a  case. 

If  any  one  will  diligently  compare  these  three 
texts.  Matt.  x.  42  ;  Mark  ix.  41  ;  Luke  ix.  48 ;  he  will 
perceive  these  three  terms — the  receivmff  any  one  as 
fxaOrjTtjv,  a  disciple — and  the  receiving  him  as  toO 
l^piarrov  ovra,  belonging  to  Christ — and  the  receiving 
him  ev  opofjLari  X.pt(Trou,  in  the  name  of  Christ — to  be 


Infant-haptism^  hut  does  not  really.  51 T 

used  by  our  Saviour  as  terms  equivalent,  signifying  chap. 
the  same  thing.  And  he  vt^ill  there  see  also  a  child  _JlL_ 
so  received  by  our  Saviour  himself.  Y®'^'"  ^^'^"^ 

•'  the  apo- 

As  for  the  language  of  the  Old  Testament;  a^ties. 
cJiild,  or  little  one,  has  the  term  given  him  of  being 
entered  into  a  covenant,  Deut.  xxix.  11,  12.  Now 
in  that  language  a  covenanter,  or  son  of  the  cove- 
Qiant ;  and  a  proselyte,  and  a  disciple,  do  signify 
the  same  thing.  An  infant  can  for  the  present  no 
more  covenant,  than  he  can  lea?'n :  yet  he  has  the 
name  of  a  covenanter,  being  entered  into  the  cove- 
nant by  his  parents. 

Beside  the  instance  that  I  gave  before  of  the 
phrase  being  ordinary  in  the  Jews'  language  to  call 
the  infant  child  that  was  dedicated  and  baptized,  a 
proselyte,  though  he  was  not  yet  capable  of  present 
learning,  but  only  was  consigned  to  learn,  there  is 
(as  Dr.  Lightfoot  in  his  HorcE  Hehraicce  quotes)  in 
Bab.  SchabbJ  fol.  31,  an  apposite  example  of  such 
a  way  of  speaking:  where  one  comes  to  Rabbi 
Hillel,  and  entreats  him  ; 

'  Fac  me  discipulum  ;  ut  me  doceas.'  Make  me 
[or  enter  me']  thy  disciple ;  that  thou  mayest  teach 
me. 

So  that  it  was  an  usual  acceptation  of  the  word 
proselyte,  or  disciple,  in  the  language  which  our 
Saviour  spoke,  and  in  which  St.  Matthew  wrote. 

It  is  said,  Luke  ix.  57,  It  came  to  pass,  as  they 
went  in  the  ivay,  a  certain  man  said  unto  him, 
Lord,  I  will  follow  thee  whitJiersoever  thou  (pest. 
Now  St.  ]\Iatthew  calls  this  man,  and  another  who 
offered  himself  at  the  same  time,  disciples.     For  he, 

"■  [Meaning  the   chapter  of  the  Babylonian  Talmud,  entitled 
Schabbath.] 


518  Evidence  that  may  seem  to  make 

CHAP.   chap.  viii.  19,  20,  21.  having  recited  the  same  that 
^        St.  Luke  does,  concerning  the  first  man,  subjoins  im- 
Year  after  mediately;  Another  of  his  disciples, 'i-repo's  Se  twv  fia- 
sties.         Oriroov  avrov^  said  UTito  Mm,  Lord,  suffer  me  first  to 
go   and   bury  my  father.     The    latter    is  expressly 
called  a  disciple  by  St.  Matthew ;  who  calling  him 
another    disciple,    does    implicitly  call    the    former 
likewise  a  disciple :  though  it  seems  to  be  the  first 
meeting  that  the  first  had  with   our  Saviour :  and 
neither  of  them  had  gone  any  further  than  to  ex- 
press a  purpose  of  following  him. 
^'5-      Eusebius,  in  his  Demonstratio  Evangelica,  lib.  iii. 
c.  5,  brings  an  instance  of  one   that  makes  a  pro- 
posal, or  sets  up  for  a  teacher  of  any  art  or  science. 
"O  T6  yap   SiSacTKcov  eTrayyeXlav  juaOij/maTog  tipo9  eiray- 
yeWcTai'    O'l   re    fxaOrjTal   pLaOrj/uLarcov   opeyo/uevoi   cnpa? 
uvTOv<i  TO)  SiSacTKaXw  irpoa-cpepovTeq  eiriTpe-rrovcnv.    '  One 
'  gives  out  that  he  will  teach  some  art.    The  disciples, 
'  being  desirous  of  the  skill,  offer  and  commit  them- 
'  selves  to  the  master.'    They  are  here  called  disciples 
before  they  had  begun  to  learn  any  thing ;  only  they 
were  appointed  to  learn. 

In  Numb.  iii.  28.  the  Kohathites  were  set  apart 
to  be  keepers  of  the  charge  of  the  sanctuary.  The 
infants,  as  well  as  their  fathers,  have  the  title  given 
them  of  keepers  of  that  charge.  For  so  are  the 
words ;  In  the  number  of  all  the  males,  from 
a  month  old  and  upward,  were  eight  thousand 
and  six  hundred,  keeping  the  charge  of  the  sanc- 
tuary. 

So  little  do  grammatical  derivations  of  words 
signify  to  limit  the  sense  of  them ;  which  must 
rather  be  taken  from  the  common  use  of  them  in  the 
books  and  languages  from  whence  they  are  quoted. 


against  Infant-baptism,  hut  does  not.  519 

Ma0>;T^?  is  derived  from  fxavQavw,  *  to  learn.'     There-  chap. 

fore,  may  a  grammarian  perhaps  say,  it  cannot  be U 

applied  but  to  one  that  does  now  actually  learn.  ^j^g'^^^J^^^ 
But  we  must  rather  see  in  what  latitude  St.  Matthew  *^^^^- 
(who,  or  whose  interpreter,  was,  I  think,  the  first 
that  formed  the  derivative  fxaOtjrevw  from  it  in  any 
active  transitive  signification)  does  use  the  word. 
And  he  uses  it  not  only  for  present  learners,  but 
for  some  that  were  appointed  to  learn.  The  word 
has  indeed  always  a  reference  to  learning ;  but  does 
not  always  suppose  that  learning  to  be  at  that  pre- 
sent time,  when  any  one  is  made  or  styled  a  disciple. 

Another  thing  that  causes  in  vulgar  people  a  pre- 
judice in  understanding  those  words  of  our  Saviour 
is  this :  A  man  that  cannot  read  books  is  apt  to 
form  all  his  notions  of  things  by  what  he  sees  in  his 
own  time  and  country.  So  an  illiterate  man  (in 
England  for  example)  hearing  of  the  apostles  being 
sent  into  the  nations  to  disciple  and  baptize  them, 
he  imagines  it  like  some  preacher's  coming  into 
England,  as  it  is  now,  to  preach  and  baptize  the 
people.  Now  this  notion  naturally  creates  in  his 
mind  a  supposal  that  Christians  did  not  baptize  their 
children  in  infancy,  because  they  are  not  now  to  be 
baptized  after  they  are  taught.  He  does  not  ani- 
madvert to  that  difference  which  appears  by  conceiv- 
ing all  those  nations  to  which  the  apostles  were  sent, 
as  heathens  ;  who  must  be  baptized  after  they  were 
taught,  having  had  no  fathers  to  baptize  them  be- 
fore. This  indeed  looks  gross ;  but  one  may  per- 
ceive plain  footsteps  and  traces  of  such  conceptions 
among  ignorant  people  in  the  tenor  and  chain  of 
their  discourse. 

5.  There  has  been  an  argument  raised    against 


520  Evidence  thai  may  seem  to  make 

CHAP,   infants'  baptism,  even  from  that  text  by  which  (among 

— — others)   the  Fathers  did  never  fail  to  prove  it.     I 

i^e&^oT^  mean,  from  those  words  of  our  Saviour,  John  iii.  5, 
sties.  which   are  in   the  Eno-]ish,  Ea'cept  a  man  be   horn 

again  of  water^  &lc.  They  catch  hold  of  the  word 
man  there,  and  say,  it  is  declared  necessary  for 
every  one  after  he  is  a  man  grown.  I  w^ould  not 
have  any  antipaedobaptist,  that  keeps  a  more  re- 
fined conversation,  think,  that  I  feign  or  impose 
this  on  them.  Tt  is  certainly  true,  that  some  ignorant 
people  in  country  places  do  not  only  urge  this,  but 
do  say  that  it  is  inculcated  to  them  l)y  their  teachers. 

I  shall  not  stand  to  shew  the  mistake  of  this,  hav- 
ing said  more  than  so  palpable  a  misunderstanding  of 
the  words,  as  they  are  in  the  original,  can  deserve, 
part  i.  ch.  6.  ^.  13  ;  part  ii.  ch.  6.  §.  1. 

6.  To  enervate  an  argument  taken  out  of  Scrip- 
ture for  infant-baptism,  is  equivalent  to  the  forming 
of  one  against  it ;  and  does  as  much  tend  to  the 
excusing  of  any  illiterate  man,  if  the  proofs  which 
should  have  convinced  him  that  children  are  to  be 
baptized,  be  eluded  either  by  translations  that  give 
an  imperfect  sense,  or  by  false  interpretations,  the 
falsehood  whereof  he  cannot  perceive.  1  shall  give 
three  instances : 

1.  In  that  text,  1  Cor.  vii.  14,  which  is  rendered 
in  English,  Now  are  your  children  holy.  The 
word  here  translated  holy  is  far  more  often  in 
St.  Paul's  Epistles  translated  saints ;  and  so  almost 
all  (not  quite  all)  the  ancients  do  understand  St.  Paul 
here,  as  if  he  had  said  in  English,  '  Now  are  your 
*  children  saints.'  They  observe,  moreover,  that 
with  St.  Paul  this  term  saints  is  generally  used  as 
another  word  for  Christians.     As,  To  the  saints  at 


against  Infant-haptism,  hit  does  not.  521 

Ephesus,  at  Rome,  &c.,  is  much   as  to  say,  To   the  chap. 
Christians  there.     Therefore  they  take  St.  Paul   to  — U — 
mean,  '  Now  are  your  children  Christians;'  that  is^^^^^plJ.'"* 
to  say,  baptized.     He  persuades  the  believing  wife'*^i''«- 
not  to  go  away,  but  to  stay,  in  hopes  that  she  may 
convert,   or  save,  as   he   words   it,   her  unbelieving 
husband  ;  and  that  the  rather,  because  it  appeared 
that  the  grace  of  God  did  generally  so  far  prevail 
ao-ainst  the  infidelitv  of  the  other,  that  the  children 
of  such  matches  were  baptized   for  the  most  part. 
This  interpretation,  or  such  as  amounts  to  the  like 
effect,  I  have  shewn  to  be  the  most  current  among 
the  primitive  Christians,  in  those  places  of  the  col- 
lection which  are  referred  to  before,  at  N".  9,  of  the 
evidences  for  infant-baptism.     And  if  it  be  allowed, 
there  needs  no  more  evidence  for  it  from  Scripture. 
But  what  shall  an  unlearned  man  do,  that  meets 
with   this   text   expounded    by   new   interpretations 
that  do  totally  set  aside  that  meaning ;  as  holy,  that 
is,  not  bastards,  &c.? 

Methinks  this  should  be  plain  ;  that  since  the 
word  ajioi  is  sometimes  translated  saints,  and  some- 
times holy,  there  should  even  at  those  places  where 
it  is  translated  holy,  be  understood  such  a  holiness 
as  is  something  agreeable  to  the  signification,  of  the 
word  saints  ;  and  not  a  new-made  signification,  in 
which  neither  St.  Paul  nor  any  other  apostle  did 
ever  use  the  word. 

2.  The  words  of  that  other  text,  John  iii.  5,  were 
always  taken  in  one  fixed  and  undoubted  sense 
and  meaning,  viz.  to  signify  baptism.  And  that 
so  known  and  supposed,  that  not  only  the  words 
at  length,  born  again  of  ivater,  &c.,  but  the  word 
horn  again,  or  regenerate,  alone  was  used  as  another 


52S  Evidence  that  may  seem  to  make 

CHAP,   word  for  bajHized,  and  regenerntio7i  for  baptism,  not 

'. —  only  by  all  the  Fathers   of  the  first  four  hundred 

thg^apo-"  y^ars,  but,   I   think,  for  above  one  thousand  years 
sties.         following.     So  here  was  a  plain  place  of  Scripture 
for  baptizing  of  all   persons   that  should  enter   the 
kingdom  of  God. 

But  even  this  has  been  in  great  measure  defeated 
by  a  new  interpretation,  much  of  the  nature  of  that 
by  which  the  Quakers  do  elude  all  those  places  that 
speak  of  the  other  sacrament.  For  as  they,  by  the 
words,  bread,  mine,  eating,  drinking,  &c.,  do  force 
themselves  to  mean  some  mystical  or  metaphorical 
thing :  as  for  bread,  something  else,  {internal  bread, 
I  think,)  and  so  of  the  rest :  so  the  new  interpreters 
of  this  place  do  by  the  word  water  here.  In  short, 
they  have  brought  it  to  this ;  that  the  text  does  not 
signify  baptism  at  all,  nor  any  thing  about  it.  And 
the  notion  and  signification  of  the  words  regenerate 
and  regeneration  is  by  degrees  so  altered  in  common 
speech,  that  he  that  reads  them  in  any  modern  book 
does  not  know  nor  understand  them  again,  when  he 
meets  with  them  in  any  ancient  one.  From  whence 
proceeds  the  wondering  that  some  have  made  at 
St.  Austin,  when  reading  occasionally  some  chapter 
of  him,  they  have  found  that  he  takes  all  that  are 
baptized  to  be  regenerate :  thinking  he  means  by 
regenerate  the  same  that  they  do,  viz.  converted  in 
heart,  &c. 

But  at  this  rate  of  altering  the  sense  of  words 
any  text  of  Scripture  whatever  may  be  eluded.  The 
most  fundamental  article  of  the  New  Testament — 
I  believe  in  Jesus  Christ.  It  is  but  to  take  the  words 
Jesus  Christ  in  a  new  sense  for  the  light  within  a 
man's  self ;  and  then,  if  he  believe  in  himself,  he 


against  Infant-haptism,  hut  does  not.  523 

holds  the  article.     Therefore  the  words  of  Scripture,  chap. 
or  of  any  old  book,  must  be   taken   in   that  sense 


in  which  they  were  current  at  that  time.     Which  J'^^^^J^^I'Jter 

because  it  is  a  thing  that  vulgar  people,  of  whom  I  sties. 

speak,  cannot  inquire  into ;  therefore  I  put  this  way 

of  evading  the  force  of  this  text  among  the  answers 

to  it  that  may  pass  with  them ;  but  it  appears  vain 

to  those  that  are  acquainted  with  the  old  use  of  the 

word. 

3.  There  is  another  interpretation  yet,  by  which 
the  force  of  that  text  is  evaded.  And  that  is  by 
such  as  do  grant  indeed  that  the  words  horn  again 
of  water,  &c.,  are  to  be  understood  of  baptism ;  but 
they  say  that  by  the  kingdom  of  God  there,  is  to  be 
understood,  not  the  kingdom  of  glory  hereafter  in 
heaven;  but  the  church  here,  or  the  dispensation 
of  the  Messiah.  So  that  it  is  as  much  as  to  say; 
Except  any  one  be  baptized,  he  cannot  enter  into, 
or  be  a  member  of,  the  church.  I  shew,  part  ii. 
ch.  vi.  §.  1.  N°.  2.  that  this  interpretation  is  plainly 
inconsistent  with  the  context :  and  also  that  it  avails 
not  this  cause,  if  it  were  allowed. 

These  last  mentioned  reasons,  evidences,  and 
arguments,  though  I  think  them  not  justly  plead- 
able against  infant-baptism,  yet  I  thought  it  fair  to 
set  them  down.  Let  every  one  pass  his  judgment. 
And  if  they  have  not  any  real  weight  in  true 
arguing,  yet  the  appearance  of  it  which  they  carry, 
does  serve  to  make  people  pass  the  more  favourable 
censure  on  those  of  the  antipsedobaptists,  who  have 
no  means  of  understanding  the  history  of  the  ancient 
times,  and  can  read  only  the  vulgar  translations  of 
Scripture,  and  do  light  only  on  such  expositors  as  I 
have  mentioned. 


524  Evidence  that  may  seem,  8fc. 

CHAP.        But  this  1  must  say;  that   any  antipsedobaptist, 

'       who  having  better  means  of  knowledge  is  convinced 

Year  after  ^|-j^|.  ^       ^^  these  arguments  have  really  no  force, 

the  apo-  J  n  .'  ' 

sties.  and  yet  does  urge  them   upon  the   more  ignorant 

people,  acts  very  disingenuously  toward  them,  and 
is  a  jDrevaricator  in  the  things  of  God.  For  to  use 
any  argument  with  an  intent  to  deceive,  hath  in  it 
(though  there  be  no  proposition  in  it  that  is  false 
in  terminis)  the  nature  of  a  lie  :  which,  as  it  is  base 
and  unmanly  in  human  affairs,  so  it  is  impious 
when  it  is  pretended  to  be  for  God ;  as  Job  says,, 
eh.  xiii.  7. 


CHAP.  XI. 

A  dissuasive  from  separation  on  account  of  the  difference  of 
opinion  about  the  age  or  time  of  receiving  baptism. 

1.  WHAT  I  have  to  say  in  this  last  chapter,  T 
have  kept  as  a  reserve  :  that  in  case  people  cannot 
be  brought  to  be  of  one  opinion  in  this  question  ; 
yet  they  may  avoid  that  which  is  nowadays  made 
a  common  consequence  of  the  difference  in  senti- 
ments about  it,  and  is  far  more  dangerous  to  their 
souls'  health,  than  the  mistake  itself  is  ;  I  mean, 
the  renouncing  of  one  another's  communion  in  all 
other  parts  of  the  Christian  worship.  Whosoever 
could  prevail  on  them  to  relinquish  this  humour 
of  dividing,  would  do  a  most  acceptable  piece  of 
service  to  the  Christian  religion  and  the  salvation 
of  their  souls. 

For  our  blessed  Saviour,  who  does  easily  pardon 
involuntary  errors  and  mistakes,  and  forbids  his 
members  to  despise  or  rtyect  one  another  for  them, 


A  Dissuasive /rout  Schism.  525 

does  impute  a  heavy  guilt  to  those  that  go  about  to    chap. 
break  or  divide  the  unity  of  his  body. 


I  had  thought  once  to  insert  here  a  discourse  of}/^'"^*'^'"' 
the  great  sin  and  mischief  of  schism:  but  having ^^^*'*- 
been  too  long  already ;  and  that  being  a  subject 
which  requires,  and  has  had,  just  tracts  written  on 
it ;  I  shall  content  myself  with  reciting  briefly  a  few 
plain  proofs  of  the  stress  which  God  in  Scripture 
lays  upon  our  endeavonrinfj/  to  keep  the  uniti/  of  the 
Spirit  (i.  e.  a  spiritual  or  religious  unity,  and  not 
only  living  quietly  near  one  another)  in  the  bond  of 
peace,  notwithstanding  differences  in  opinions. 

1.  There  is  no  one  thing  that  is  oftener,  nor  so 
often,  commanded,  inculcated,  entreated,  and  prayed 
for,  by  our  Saviour  and  his  apostles,  than  that  all 
Christians  should  be  one,  and  as  members  of  the 
same  body.  And  on  the  other  side,  no  sin  that  is 
more  severely  forbidden,  rej^resented  as  more  mis- 
chievous, nor  more  terribly  threatened,  than  divi- 
sions, schisms,  separations,  and  whatsoever  breaks 
the  said  unity.  St.  Paul  does  not  only  reckon  such 
things  as  undoubted  signs  of  a  carnal  mind,  1  Cor. 
iii.  3,  4.  but  also,  when  he  gives  a  roll  or  catalogue 
of  the  sins  which  are  certainly  damning,  which  they 
that  practise  shall  not  inherit  the  kingdom  of  God, 
Gal.  V.  19,  20,  21.  such  as  adultery,  drunkenness,  &c. 
he  reckons  among  the  rest  o-Tcco-ef?  kcCi  alpea-ei?,  which 
we  render  seditions,  heresies,  which  are  the  names 
which  he  commonly  gives  to  divisions.  Since  his 
time,  indeed,  the  latter  of  those  words  has  been  used 
to  denote  false  doctrines  in  the  fundamentals  of 
faith :  but  he  never  means  any  thing  else  by  it,  but 
parties,  factions,  sects,  or  divisions.  One  plain  instance 
in   what   sense   he  takes  it  is  in    1  Cor.  xi.  18,  19- 


526  A  Dissuasive  from  Schism. 

CHAP,  where  what   are   called    divisions  in   one  verse  are 
called  heresies  in  the  other.     Let  any  one  read  this 


\ear  after  ^g^t  for  the  meaning  of  the  word  :  and  then  let  him 

the  apo-  " 

sties.  turn  back  again  to  Gal.  v.  19-  where  adultery,  mur- 
der, and  heresies  are  declared  subject  to  the  same 
condemnation,  of  exclusion  from  God's  kingdom. 

The  sinfulness  of  schism  is  so  plainly,  fully,  and 
frequently  set  forth  by  our  Saviour  and  his  apostles, 
that  there  are  no  Christian  writers  or  teachers  of 
any  church  whatever,  but  what  do,  if  they  are  re- 
quired to  speak,  own  that  it  is  in  its  nature  a  mortal 
sin ;  even  the  leaders  of  schismatical  congregations 
dare  not  deny  it.  If  they  did,  they  would  be  con- 
victed of  denying  plain  Scripture.  But  as  arch- 
bishop Tillotson  does  somewhere  ^  observe  of  the 
popish  preachers,  that  though  they  do  own  in  their 
writings  and  disputes  with  the  protestants,  that  re- 
pentance and  amendment  of  life  is  necessary  to  the 
forgiveness  of  sins  ;  yet  in  their  discourses  to  their 
people  they  say  so  much  of  confession  to  a  priest,  &c., 
and  so  little  of  amendment  of  life,  that  the  people 
think  all  of  the  one,  and  little  of  the  other  :  so  there 
are  several  teachers,  who,  among  all  the  sins  that 
they  forewarn  their  people  of,  do  so  seldom  preach 
against  schism  and  division,  so  seldom  quote  those 
places  of  Scripture  that  set  forth  the  guilt  of  it ; 
and  when  they  do,  do  touch  that  point  so  tenderly : 
that  the  people,  if  they  do  not  trust  their  oM'n  eyes 
in  reading  God's  word,  and  taking  it  all  together, 
are  apt  to  forget  that  schism  is  any  sin  at  all :  or 
at  most,  they  conceive  of  it  as  of  a  little  one.  All 
the  Christians  near  our  Saviour's  time  had  a  quite 

k  [See  his  Sermon  No.  io8,  on  Job  xxxiii.  27.  printed  in   vol. 
ii.  p.  29.  of  his  Works,  fol.  London,  1714,  &c.] 


A  Dissuasive  from  Schism.  527 

contrary  sentiment.     They,  when  they  gathered  up   chap. 
into  one    short   draught   or   creed  the  most   funda-  ' 


mental  and  necessary  truths  that  they  were  to  hokl,  Y*^^'"^^'^'' 
put  in  this  for  one;  '  I  beheve  the  holy  catholic st'es. 
'  church,  and  the  communion  of  saints  ;'  i.  e.  I  own 
the  universal  church,  and  that  all  Christians  in  it 
ought  to  hold  communion  one  with  another.  For 
the  word  saints  is  in  Scripture  and  all  other  old 
Christian  books  used  as  another  word  for  Chris- 
tians :  and  '  the  communion  of  saints'  means  nothino- 

o 

else  in  the  Creed  but  the  communion  of  Christians. 
He  then  that  believes  other  things  to  be  duties, 
and  this  to  be  none,  ought,  when  he  repeats  the 
Creed,  to  say ;  I  believe  all  the  rest  of  it,  but  I 
do  not  own  '  the  communion  of  saints'  as  any  article 
of  Christian  faith. 

II.  2.  Whereas  the  sinfulness  of  schism   in  o-ene- 

CD 

ral  will  not  bear  a  dispute :  but  all  people  that  sepa- 
rate, do,  if  they  be  forced  to  speak,  own,  as  I  said, 
schism  to  be  a  great  sin  ;  but  do  say  withal  that 
their  separation  is  not  schism  in  the  Scripture-sense, 
because  the  church,  from  which  they  have  sepa- 
rated, is  such,  as  from  which  one  ought  to  separate  : 
and  whereas  the  reason  that  is  usually  given  of  the 
necessity  of  a  separation  of  one  from  another,  is, 
that  one  party  holds  tenets  and  opinions  which  the 
other  cannot  assent  to,  or  administers  some  of  the 
divine  offices  in  such  ways  as  the  other  does  not  ap- 
prove ;  but  takes  the  opinions  to  be  errors,  and  the 
said  administrations  to  be  grounded  on  those  errors  : 
the  thing  to  be  inquired  is,  whether  these  opinions, 
which  are  judged  to  be  errors,  be  such  as  do  over- 
throw the  foundation  of  Christian  faith.  For  if 
they  be  such,  the  plea  must  be  allowed.     False  doc- 


528  The  Sin  and  Mischief  of  Schism. 

CHAP,  trines  in  the  fundamentals  of  religion  do  put  a  bar 
'      to  our  communion  with  those  that  teach  them. 


Year  after        g^^  j^-  ^|^g„  j^^  ^^^^  sucli,  we  liave  a  plain  direction 

the  apo-  •'  '  i 

«ties.  and  order  from  St.  Paul  to  bear  with  one  another,  to 
receive  one  another  to  communion,  notwithstanding 
differences  in  them,  and  not  to  judge  or  despise  one 
another  for  them.  He  has  a  discourse  purposely  on 
this  subject.  It  begins  Rom.  xiv.  1.  He  continues 
it  through  all  that  chapter,  and  to  verse  8,  of  the 
next.  He  instances  in  men  holding  contrary  sides 
in  the  disputes  which  troubled  the  church  at  that 
time.  He  both  begins  and  ends  that  discourse  with 
a  positive  command  that  they  receive  one  another 
notwithstanding  them ;  and  he  plainly  means  (as 
whoever  reads  the  whole  place  will  observe)  to  com- 
munion as  brethren  ;  and  not  only  to  live  in  peace 
and  quietness  with  one  another ;  which  last  they 
were  to  do  with  the  heathens  their  neighbours. 

He  orders  those  of  them  that  were  positive,  and 
sure  that  their  opinion  was  the  right,  to  content 
themselves  with  that  full  persuasion  of  their  own 
mind^  and  to  take  it  for  granted  that  they  are  not 
bound  to  bring  all  the  rest  over  to  their  opinion  ; 
nor  yet  to  forsake  their  communion,  if  they  will  not 
so  be  brought,  ver.  22 :  Hast  thou  faiths  {faith  here 
signifies  that /w//  'persuasion  of  mind  mentioned  be- 
fore at  ver.  5,)  have  it  to  thyself  before  God.  He 
would  have  them  be  so  modest,  as  to  think  at  the 
same  time  that  others,  as  good  as  they,  might  yet 
continue  of  the  other  opinion. 

He  shews,  ch.  xv.  ver.  5,  6,  that  they  may,  not- 
withstanding these  differences,  with  one  mind  and 
one  mouth  glorify  God.  And  whereas  he  prays  there 
that   they  may  be   (as   we  translate  it  in    English) 


The  Sin  and  Mischief  of  Schism.  529 

like-minded  one   toward  another;  those   phrases,   of  chap. 

XI. 

like-ininded,  and  one  mind,  do  not  import  that  they 


that  thus  join  in  glorifying-  God  must  of  necessity  ^j^p^^^j'*^'" 
be  all  of  one  opinion  in  disputable  matters;  for  it^*'*"^- 
has  been  all  along  his  scope  to  shew,  that  they  might 
well  enough  do  that,  though  each  did  keep  his  seve- 
ral opinion  in  those  things.  But  those  phrases  de- 
note only,  that  they  should  do  it  unanimously, 
(which  is  the  proper  rendering  of  the  word  o/uoOv/aa- 
Soi,  and  that  which  St.  Paul  generally  means  by  the 
word  avro  (ppoveiv,  as  bishop  Stillingfleet  has  sheM'n  \ 
by  instances.  And  they  might  be  unanimous  in 
glorifying  God,  though  they  were  not  all  of  a  mind 
as  to  meats,  days,  &c.,  since  in  the  main  matters 
they  were  all  of  a  mind. 

And  though  St.  Paul  there  do  instance  only  in  the 
disputes  about  meats,  and  drinks,  and  days,  &c.,  yet 
the  tenor  of  his  discourse,  and  the  reasons  he  gives 
against  separating  for  them,  do  reach  to  all  differ- 
ences that  are  not  fundamental.  For  that  which  he 
says,  The  kingdom  of  God  is  not  meat  and  drink, 
hut  righteousness,  &c.,  is  applicable  to  any  opinions 
that  are  not  of  the  foundation  :  the  kingdom  of  God, 
or  substance  of  religion,  does  not  consist  in  such 
things.  And  as  he  says,  For  meat  destroy  not  the 
work  of  God;  we  may  say  of  such  opinions,  do 
not  for  such  things  destroy  that  unity  which  Christ 
has  made  so  essential  to  his  church.  But  it  is  other- 
wise of  the  fundamental  articles  of  our  faith  ;  for  in 
them  the  kingdom  of  God  does  consist.  If  any  one 
do  hold,  or  practise  idolatry,  or  the  worship  of  any 
but  the  true  God  ;  or  do  deny  the  divinity  of  Christ, 

1  Unreasonableness  of  Separation,  part  ii.  sect.  19,  20.  [p.  17. 
163 — 175.  4°.  London,  1682.] 

WALL,   VOL.  II,  M  m 


550  Differences  of  Opinions 

CHAP,   or  his  death  for  our  sins,  or  the  necessity  of  repent- 

L_  ance  and  a  good  life,  or  the  belief  of  the  resurrection 

l^l,^lT^  and  judgment   to    come  ;  the  apostle   would   never 
sties.  have  bid  us  receive  such,  or  hold   communion  with 

them. 

But  there  are,  besides  those  that  hold  such  doc- 
trines, pernicious  to  the  foundation,  abundance  of 
Christians  that  hold  the  same  faith  in  all  funda- 
mental points,  who  do  yet  live  in  division  and 
separation,  disowning  and  renouncing  one  another's 
communion.  It  is  pity  but  these  should  be  reduced 
to  the  unity  which  Christ's  body  requires. 

Now  there  is  no  other  way  in  the  world  to  effect 
this,  but  only  that  which  the  apostle  here  prescribes, 
viz.  that  they  receive  one  another,  notwithstanding 
the  different  opinions  they  may  hold  about  lesser 
matters.  There  have  other  ways  been  tried,  ways 
of  human  policy ;  but  all  with  wretched  success. 
They  have  been  tried  with  so  much  obstinacy,  as 
almost  to  ruin  the  church. 

The  church  of  Rome  has  tried  to  reduce  all  men 
to  unity,  by  forcing  them  to  be  all  of  one  opinion, 
and  to  submit  their  judgments  to  her  dictates ; 
some  of  which  are  things  which  the  Scripture 
teaches  not,  and  some  directly  contrary  to  it.  They 
use  to  this  purpose,  first,  disputations  ;  and  when 
that  will  not  do,  then  fire  and  fagot,  or  other  cruel- 
ties. We  have  lived  to  see  what  tyrannous,  un- 
christian, and  bloody  work  a  neighbour  prince  has 
made  ™  to  bring  all  his  subjects  to  be  of  one  religion, 
(as  he  calls  it,)  that  is,  all  of  one  opinion  in  all 
things  delivered  by    that   church ;  which   has  been 

™  [Alluding  to  the  transactions  in  France,  connected  with  the 
revocation  of  the  edict  of  Nantes,  &c.  j 


consist  with  Communion.  531 

far   from    limitins:    herself  to  fundamental    articles,   chap, 

XI. 

And  we  have  seen  the  event ;  he  has  made  some '. — 


hypocrites  and  apostates,  who  do  upon  all  occasions  ^1,^^!^^*.'^'" 
shew  the  regret  of  their  conscience;  some  refugees, ^*'^^' 
and  some  martyrs.  This  way  therefore  of  bringing 
people  to  glorifying  God  unanimously,  by  drawing 
up  a  set  of  particular  opinions,  and  forcing  all  men 
to  subscribe  to  them,  is  no  successful  way.  It  re- 
quires of  men  what  God  in  Scripture  never  requires. 
It  has  filled  the  world  with  blood  and  enmity,  and 
has  made  Christendom  a  shambles.  St.  Paul  with 
all  his  apostolical  authority  does  not,  we  see,  re- 
quire it ;  but  says,  in  such  things  let  each  be  fully 
persuaded  in  his  own  mind,  (meaning,  till  one  by 
reason  do  convince  the  other,  or  be  convinced  by 
him,)  and  in  the  mean  time  receive  and  own  one 
another  as  brethren. 

Another  way  that  has  been  tried,  is  quite  on  the 
contrary,  and  runs  to  the  other  extreme.  It  is  this. 
They  that  are  of  different  oi)inions  in  these  lesser 
matters,  say  thus ;  we  will  not  receive  each  other 
at  all,  i.  e.  not  to  any  Christian  communion  ;  and 
yet  we  will  obtain  the  end  that  St.  Paul  would 
have,  viz.  the  setting  forth  the  glory  of  God,  by 
another  way  as  good.  Since  we  are  of  this  opinion 
and  you  of  that,  do  you  make  one  church  of  Christ, 
and  we  will  make  another :  we  will  own  no  church- 
communion  with  you,  nor  you  with  us ;  we  will 
neither  receive  you,  nor  desire  to  be  received  by 
you.  And  yet  we  will  live  in  peace,  and  try  which 
shall  come  to  heaven  soonest. 

Now  this  is  on  the  other  side  the  most  contrary 
to  the  nature  and  design  of  Christianity  of  any 
thing  that  could  be  devised.     For  Christ,  as  he   is 

M  m  2 


532  Not  several  Churches 

CHAP,  but  one  head,  never  designed  to  have  any  more  but 

XI  'ft  J 

.  one  body.   Here  we  see  already  two,  totally  distinct, 

l^el^oT^  for  they  receive  not  one  another.  And  observe  the 
sties.  consequence  of  such  a  principle.  They  continue 
but  a  very  little  while,  before  that  in  each  of  these 
churches,  some  members  differing  from  the  rest  in 
opinion  about  some  new-started  matter,  make  a 
subdivision,  as  necessary  as  the  first  division  was. 
Then  the  church  which  out  of  one  became  two,  out 
of  two  is  propagated  to  four ;  and  by  the  same  rea- 
son, and  by  following  on  the  same  principle,  there 
will  quickly  be  forty.  Nay,  it  is  certain,  and  will 
be  plain  to  any  one  that  considers,  that  by  driving 
that  principle  home,  of  making  separate  churches, 
of  all  different  opinions,  it  will  come  to  pass  at  last, 
that  there  will  not  be  any  two  men  of  one  church. 
For  if  all  things  relating  to  religion  were  to  be  can- 
vassed, there  are  not  any  two  men  in  the  world  of 
the  same  mind  in  all  things. 

The  fault  therefore  of  this  way  is  evident.  They 
are  in  the  right  in  supposing  that  there  will  always 
be  variety  of  opinions  ;  and  that  it  is  in  vain  to 
think  by  any  force  to  prevent  it.  But  to  think  that 
the  number  of  churches  must  hold  pace  Mith  the 
number  of  opinions,  is  a  mistake  of  wretched  conse- 
quence. It  makes  Christ's  church,  which  should  be 
a  compacted  body,  a  rope  of  sand.  It  perpetuates  for 
ever  those  strifes  and  janglings  about  opinions, 
which  in  one  communion  would  quickly  cease :  for 
each  party,  when  they  have  thus  taken  sides,  will 
always  strive  to  justify  their  own  side.  It  is  that 
which  the  ancient  Christians  call,  '  the  setting  up 
*  altar  against  altar.'  It  gives  so  advantageous  a 
handle  to  the  common   enemy,  that  he   desires  no 


for  several  Opinions.  583 

other,   to  ruin   any  church   that  is  so   divided   into   chap. 
parties.     St.  Paul  well  apprehended  the  consequence 


of  such  dividings,  when  he"  besought  the  Corin- J^^''^^^*^'' 
thians  by  the  name  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  that  sties. 
they  would  not  admit  of  any  such  method :  and 
when  he  entreated  the  Christians  at  Rome",  that  if 
any  one  among  them  did  go  about  such  a  practice, 
the  effect  should  be,  that  every  one  of  them  should 
avoid  him.  In  a  word,  where  Christianity  is  in 
this  state,  it  is  in  the  next  degree  to  dissolution. 

And  whereas  the  proposers  or  defenders  of  this 
course  do  say ;  we  may  live  in  peace,  though  we  do 
renounce  one  another's  communion  in  religion :  this 
is  neither  practicable  for  any  long  time,  nor  is  it 
sufficient  for  a  Christian's  purpose.  Not  practicable; 
for,  as  our  Saviour  has  said,  a  house  so  divided 
cannot  stand  ;  so  we  see  by  experience  the  heart- 
burnings, and  hatred,  and  emulations,  and  bitter 
zeal,  which  the  separate  parties  do  always  shew  one 
against  another.  Not  sufficient ;  because  Christ  re- 
quires that  all  his  disciples  should  be  as  brethren, 
and  as  limbs  of  the  same  body,  which  is  more  than 
outward  peace  and  quietness.  The  heathen  neigh- 
bour cities  that  M^orshipped  several  gods,  would 
sometimes  make  a  league  of  peace,  and  say,  Do  you 
worship  your  God,  and  we  will  worship  ours,  with- 
out meddling  with  one  another's  religion  :  but  it  is 
horrible  so  to  divide  Christ. 

It  remains  therefore  that  there  is  no  other  way 
to  answer  the  design  of  Christ,  than  that  Christians 
of  the  same  faith  do  hold  communion  and  receive 
one  another,  notwithstanding  their  various  opinions. 
And  if  any  one  object  against  his  joining  with  the 

^  1  Cor.  i.  lo.  o  Rom.  xvi.  17. 


534  Tlte  Division  icorse  than  the  Error. 

CHAP,  established  church  where  he  lives,  that  he  is  of  one 
opinion,  and   they  of  another  in   many  things  ;   he 


the  1^0-^^  needs  only  to  mind,  that  this  is  the  very  case  that 
^^^^^-  St.  Paul  was  here  speaking  of,  when  he  bids  them 
receive  one  another.  They  that  he  speaks  to,  were 
likewise  of  different  opinions  ;  and  it  was  on  occasion 
of  such  difference  that  he  gives  them  this  command 
of  not  separating  for  them. 

Before  I  go  any  further,  I  shall  observe  two 
corollaries  that  do  naturally  follow  from  what  has 
been  said. 

One  is,  that  in  far  the  greatest  number  of  the 
divided  churches  and  parties  that  are  in  Chris- 
tendom, the  sin,  the  mischief,  and  the  danger  to 
their  souls  does  not  consist  so  much  in  the  tenets 
and  opinions  for  which  they  differ,  as  in  the  divi- 
sions which  they  make  for  them,  the  separations, 
the  mutual  excommunications,  or  renouncing  of  one 
another^'s  communion.  This  I  conceive  to  be  so 
clear  a  truth,  that  whereas  if  I  had  a  friend  or 
brother,  or  any  one  for  whose  eternal  good  I  were 
most  concerned,  that  differed  in  some  such  opinions 
from  the  church  where  he  lived,  and,  as  I  thought, 
from  the  truth ;  and  yet  did  resolve  and  declare 
(as  the  old  English  puritans  did)  that  he  would 
make  no  disturbance  or  sejmration  ;  I  should  think 
it  a  thing  of  no  great  consequence  whether  ever 
his  opinion  were  rectified  or  not :  yet,  if  I  found 
that  he  were  inclined  to  separate,  I  should  think 
labour  ought  to  be  taken,  as  for  his  life,  to  hinder 
that. 

The  other  is  ;  that  those  churches  which  do  im- 
pose, as  terms  of  communion,  (1  mean  of  lay-com- 
munion,) the  fewest  subscriptions,  or  indeed  none  at 


The  Dimsion  worse  than  the  Error.  535 

all,  to   any  doctrines,  beside  the  fundamental  doc-  chap, 

XL 

trines  of  Christian  faith  ;  have  in  that  respect  the 


best  and  most  excellent  constitution.  It  is  fitted  for  ^^^g'^^^^^*^'^ 
the  fulfilling  of  this  command  of  the  apostle.  To  do  «'^'''*- 
otherwise,  is  to  refuse  what  he  here  prescribes,  of 
receiving  one  that  is  weak  in  the  faith.  For  sup- 
posing those  doctrines  to  be  true,  yet  he  may  think 
otherwise  ;  and  then  he  cannot  be  received  without 
affirming  what  is  in  his  conscience  a  falsehood.  He 
is  therefore  rejected  ;  and  as  far  as  the  church  can 
go,  lost.  Whereas  if  he  had  been  received  without 
such  a  condition,  he  might  either  have  learned 
better  in  time  ;  or  if  he  had  not,  that  error  would 
not  finally  have  much  hurt  him,  for  it  is  supposed 
to  be  no  fundamental  one.  Nor  would  it  have  hurt 
the  church ;  for  he  is  supposed  to  be  one  that  de- 
sired to  be  received,  and  that  would  not  have  made 
any  schism  for  it.  I  do  not  pretend  to  know  the 
history  of  the  constitutions  of  the  many  churches 
that  now  are ;  but  of  all  that  I  do  know,  the  church 
of  England  is  in  this  respect  the  best  constituted. 
That  church  requires  of  a  layman  no  declaration, 
subscription,  or  profession,  but  only  of  the  baptismal 
covenant.  Any  person,  when  he  is  baptized,  must 
by  himself,  if  he  be  of  age,  by  his  sponsors,  if  an  in- 
fant, profess  to  renounce  the  Devil  and  all  wick- 
edness, to  believe  the  Creed,  and  to  keep  God's 
commandments.  There  is  nothing  required  after 
this  to  his  full  communion,  save  that  he  learn,  and 
answer  to  the  questions  of,  a  very  short  catechism ;  of 
one  clause  whereof  T  must  by  and  by  say  something. 
Nobody  can  in  other  matters  compel  him  to  subscribe 
the  opinions  which  the  church  thinks  truest,  nor  to 
recant  those  which  he  thinks  truest. 


5S6  The  Division  worse  than  the  Error. 

CHAP.       III.  3.  The  same  that  has  been  said  of  different 

XI. 

opinions  in  doctrinal  points,  not  fundamental,  may 

^hel^o^^  be  applied  to  the  several  ways  of  ordering  the  public 
sties.  worship,  prayers,  administration  of  the  sacraments, 

&c.  Of  which  ways  it  does  as  naturally  fall  out, 
that  some  do  like  one  best,  and  some  another; 
as  it  does  of  the  foresaid  different  opinions,  that 
some  think  one  true,  and  some  the  other.  The 
same  rule  for  avoiding  of  schism  must  therefore  be 
applied  here  as  there  :  only  with  this  difference  ;  of 
those  opinions,  there  was  no  necessity  that  the  man, 
I  spoke  of,  should  be  required  to  assent  to  such  as 
the  generality  thought  the  truest  ;  but  here  the  na- 
ture of  the  thing  requires,  that  if  he  hold  commu- 
nion, he  must  join  in  the  prayers  and  other  service. 
I  must  divide  the  difficulties  that  may  arise  upon 
this,  into  two  cases. 

One  man  does  not  apprehend  any  thing  sinful, 
unlawful,  or  erroneous,  in  any  of  the  prayers  or 
service ;  but  yet  he  likes  some  other  ceremonies, 
orders,  and  ways  of  worship  that  are  used  in  some 
other  nations  or  churches,  better  than  he  does  those 
of  his  own.  And  therefore  he  holds  it  lawful,  and 
useful  for  spiritual  advancement,  to  gather  together 
a  number  of  men  of  a  like  taste  and  relish  with 
himself,  and  make  a  sejjarate  body  by  themselves. 

This  man  has  but  a  very  little  and  slight  sense 
of  the  sin  of  schism  ;  scandalously  little.  Either  he 
has  not  read  what  the  Scripture  says  of  it ;  or  else 
dulness  or  prejudice  has  taken  off  the  edge  of  his 
apprehension,  so  as  that  he  felt  nothing  at  the  read- 
ing of  those  earnest  and  moving  passages  of  our  Sa- 
viour and  the  apostles  on  that  subject.  To  confess 
the  orders  and  service  of  a  church  to  be  lawful,  and 


The  Division  worse  than  the  Error.  537 

to  join   in   them   perhaps   sometimes  ;    and    yet    to  c  ha  p. 

foment    the    mischief  of  schism,  under    which    all 

Christendom,  especially  the  protestant  religion,  and  j,,g''^p*^,'^'' 
particularly  the  state  of  religion  in  England  and^''^*- 
Holland,  does  now  groan  and  gasp  !  and  all  this  for 
a  gust,  a  flavour,  an  humour,  an  itching  ear  pleased 
with  this  or  that  mode  of  preaching,  praying,  &c. 
To  divide  the  body  of  Christ  out  of  mere  wanton- 
ness !  What  answer  will  such  an  one  make  at  the 
last  day,  for  having  made  so  light  of  that  on  which 
the  word  of  God  has  laid  such  a  stress?  St.  Paul^ 
entreats  by  the  consolation  in  Christ,  by  the  com- 
fort of  love,  by  the  felloivship  of  the  Spirit,  by  all 
bowels  and  mercies,  that  Christians  should  be  una- 
nimous :  is  it  then  a  matter  of  small  moment  to  di- 
vide them  into  sides,  parties,  and  several  bodies  ? 

That  among  various  ceremonies,  forms,  and  me- 
thods of  ordering  church  matters  one  should  like 
one  best,  and  one  another,  is  no  new  or  strange 
thino-  at  all ;  but  ever  was  and  ever  will  be.  But 
yet  in  the  primitive  times,  if  any  man  or  number  of 
men  went  about  upon  that  pretence  to  set  up  a 
separate  party  from  the  established  church  of  that 
place,  it  made  the  Christians  tremble  to  hear  of 
such  a  thing.  And  all  the  neighbouring  churches 
(for  they  then  all  kept  a  correspondence  and  com- 
munion with  one  another)  did  use  to  send  notice  of 
their  abhorrence  of  such  separatists,  and  renounce 
any  conmiunion  with  them  during  their  schism  ; 
and  never  were  at  ease  till  they  had  restored  unity. 
A  practice  which  the  pastors  of  the  church  of 
Geneva  have  lately  in  a  generous  and  laudable  way 
imitated    in    respect    of    our    English    separatists, 

<i  Phil.  ii.  I . 


5S8  We  ought  to  join  in  Public  Worship, 

CHAP,  though  using  in  most  things  the   same  ceremonies 
that  those  of  Geneva  do.     They  had  indeed  various 


the^apo-^"^  usages  in  the  churches  of  several  countries ;  but  a 
sties.  Christian  of  Africa,  if  he  came  to  Greece,  complied 

with  the  Grecian  ceremonies,  though  he  might  h'ke 
his  own  better.  Or,  if  it  happened  otherwise  that 
he  liked  those  of  Greece  better  than  his  own,  yet 
upon  his  return  home  he  submitted  to  the  rules  and 
customs  of  his  own  church,  and  did  not  set  up  a  new 
sect  out  of  a  pride  that  he  had  learned  a  better  way. 
If  he  thought  it  was  better,  or  if  it  really  were  so, 
yet  to  make  a  separation  for  it  did  ten  times  more 
mischief  than  that  amendment  could  recompense. 
If  there  be  any  usage  or  order  in  a  church  which 
may  be  altered  for  the  better,  for  any  man  in  his 
station  to  do  his  endeavour  that  this  may  be  done 
by  common  vote  and  consent,  was  ever  accounted 
laudable.  And  where  the  corruption  is  got  into  the 
vitals  of  religion,  it  is  true  that  it  must  be  done  by 
a  separation,  rather  than  not  at  all.  But  in  other 
cases,  where  it  is  not  a  gangrene,  he  that  goes  about 
to  cure  the  body  by  tearing  it  limb  from  limb,  is 
himself  the  most  dangerously  infected  member,  and 
ought  to  be  first  cut  off,  by  St.  Paul's  direction'',  if 
he  had  any  skill.  As  we  say  of  sermons,  that  must 
be  an  excellent  one  indeed,  in  which  there  is  nothing 
that  might  have  been  said  better  ;  and  yet  that  must 
be  a  sorry  one  indeed,  out  of  which  one  may  not 
receive  some  wholesome  direction  ;  or  of  cities,  there 
is  hardly  any  whose  laws  and  government  are  not 
capable  of  amendment  in  some  things  ;  and  yet  very 
few  so  ill-governed,  where  an  industrious  and  peace- 
able man  may  not  enjoy  so  much  quiet  as  to  get  a 
livelihood  by  his  diligence  :  so  that  must  be  a  pure 
>■  Rom.  xvi.  17. 


though  we  think  another  Way  better.  539 

church  indeed,  whose  orders  and  rules  have  no  fault  chap. 
or  imperfection  at  all ;  and  yet  that  must  be  a  woe- 


ful  church,  with  which   a  good  Christian  may  not  Ye^^^^^fter 
communicate;  or  under   whose  doctrine  and  disci- sties, 
pline  he  may  not  by  a  godly  diligence  work  out  his 
salvation.     Of  the  first  sort  there   is    none  in   the 
world.      And,    as    I    hope,    no    protestant    national 
church  of  the  latter  sort ;  none,  I  mean,  with  which 
a  good  Christian  may   not    communicate,  provided 
they  will  admit  him  without  requiring  his  declared 
assent  to  all  their  tenets.    For  errors  they  may  have, 
and  some  of  them  hold  some  opinions  contrary  to 
what  others   do ;  yet  since  none  of  these  do  over- 
throw the  foundation  of  Christian  faith,  neither  do 
they  mix  any  idolatry  in  their  worship.     If  any  party 
of  the  members  of  any  of  these  churches  (the  church 
of  Denmark  for  example)  should  in  opposition  to  the 
general  body  of  the  church  there,  say,  "  We  like  the 
"  ways    and    methods    of  some    other    church   (tlie 
"  church    of   England    for   example)    better ;"    and 
should  thereupon  make  a  schism  from  their  fellow- 
members,  it  would  be  a  sinful  one.     And  it  is  no 
other  in  ours  here  that  do  the  like.     The  church  of 
England  do  declare  thus^  concerning  the  rites  and 
ceremonies  which  they  have  ordered  :  '  In  these  our 
'  doings  we  condemn  no  other  nations,  nor  prescribe 
'  any  thing  but  to  our  own  people  only.     For  we 
'  think  it  convenient,  that  every  country  should  use 
'  such  ceremonies  as  they  shall  think  best  to  the  set- 
'  ting  forth  of  God's  honour  and  glory,  and   to  the 
'  reducing  of  the  people  to  a  most  perfect  and  godly 
'  living,  &c.,  and   that  they  should  put  away  other 

s  Preface  to  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer.      [Of  ceremonies, 
why  some  be  abolished  and  some  retained.] 


540  We  ought  to  join  in  public  Worship, 

CHAP.    '  things  which  from  time  to  time  they  perceive  to  be 
'—  '  most    abused  ;    as    in    men's   ordinances    it    often 


thrapo-*^^'   '  chanceth  diversely  in  divers  countries.'     They  say 
sties.  moreover  ;  '  Although  the  kee])ing  or  omitting  of  a 

'  ceremony,  in  itself  considered,  is  but  a  small 
'  thing  ;  yet  the  wilful  and  contemptuous  transgres- 
'  sion  and  breaking  of  a  common  order  and  disci- 
'  pline  is  no  small  offence  before  God.'  This  plainly 
shews  that  they  would  not  approve  of  a  schism  that 
should  be  set  up  in  any  other  church,  though  it  were 
for  the  introducing  of  those  ways  of  worship  which 
they  have  prescribed.  And  many  of  the  chiefest 
men  of  other  protestant  churches  have  made  the  like 
declaration  on  their  side.  This  is  the  ancient  way 
of  a  catholic  correspondence  and  unity  between  the 
churches.  They  do  all  judge  thus;  that  in  those 
various  ways  of  all  managing  the  public  worship, 
though  one  may  think  one  the  best,  and  another 
another,  yet  that  the  worst  of  them  with  unity  is 
better  than  the  best  without  it. 

This  may  be  explained  by  a  comparison  taken 
from  temporal  affairs.  There  are  in  several  nations 
several  forms  of  state  government ;  one  is  ruled  by 
monarchy,  another  by  a  senate,  others  by  more 
popular  ways.  It  is  common  for  men  of  reading,  or 
travel,  or  conversation,  to  discourse  of  these  ways. 
One  likes  one  best,  and  another  another.  And  so  far 
there  is  no  harm  done ;  because  each  of  them  resolves 
as  yet,  that  whichsoever  he  likes  best,  he  will  live 
quietly  under  that  where  he  is  placed.  But  if  one 
of  these  who  lives  under  either  of  these  forms  do  go 
about  to  draw  a  party  after  him,  and  says,  "  We 
"  will  live  no  longer  under  this  form  of  government ; 
"  we  know  a  better  way,  and  we  will  set  up  that ;" 


thouah  we  fhinl-  another  Wa^  hetter.  541 

he  is  now  turned  a  traitor,  and  must  be  suppressed  chap. 
by  the  policy  of  any  government  whatsoever.  ^  ^' 


Or  in  an  army;  if  the  question  be,  whether  it  be ^^=''" ^*'^'^'' 

*^      _  '      ^  the  apo- 

best  to  march  this  way  against  the  enemy,  or  that  sties. 
way,  or  lie  still ;  each  one  in  the  council  is  free  to 
give  his  opinion.  And  it  may  be,  that  he  whose 
counsel  is  not  approved  by  the  majority,  gives  advice 
which  is  really  the  better.  Yet  if  the  resolution  be 
once  taken,  and  the  general  lead  out  accordingly 
one  way;  if  any  officers  go  about  to  draw  a  part 
of  the  army  after  them,  and  say,  "  AA^e  will  march 
"  the  other  M-ay,"  they  are  now  mutineers  and 
public  enemies,  how  good  soever  their  advice  were. 
Because  either  of  the  ways  with  the  union  of  the 
army  is  better  than  the  dividing  of  it:  that  brings 
certain  ruin  and  confusion. 

The  Scripture  and  experience  too  do  shew  that 
the  case  is  the  same  in  reference  to  a  church.  Only 
as  in  the  army,  if  the  soldiers  do  understand  by  any 
plain  and  certain  discovery  that  the  general  officers 
are  traitors,  and  have  agreed  to  betray  their  prince's 
cause,  a  revolt  from  them  is  in  such  case  fidelity  to 
their  sovereign  ;  so  if  a  church  do  bring  into  their 
worship  plain  idolatry,  or  into  their  doctrines  such 
positions  as  destroy  the  foundation  of  Christian  faith 
or  godliness;  this  is  treason  against  our  chief  Lord, 
and  justifies  separation  from  such  a  church.  But  in 
the  case  now  put,  of  a  man  that  allows  the  established 
way  of  worship  to  be  lawful,  but  ])retends  to  set  up 
a  better,  and  thinks  a  separation  justifiable  on  that 
account ;  such  a  man  is  so  far  from  being  fit  to 
be  a  leader  or  amender  of  a  church,  that  he  needs  a 
catechism  to  teach  him  the  first  Christian  principles 
of  humility  and  modesty.    Modesty  would  teach  him 


542  We  ought  to  join  in  public  Worship, 

CHAP,  to  think,  that  if  he  judge  one  way  the  best,  another 
"         as  wise  as  he  will  be  for  another  way,  and  a  third 

^hel ^^^^'^  V^^^J  foi'  another,  &c.     But  God  is  a  God  of  order, 

sties.         and  not  of  such  confusions. 

What  I  quoted  just  now  of  the  declaration  of  the 
church  of  England  in  respect  to  foreign  churches, 
does  visibly  shew  the  mistake  of  those  that  argue 
that  we  cannot  count  those  among  us  that  separate 
schismatics ;  but  that  we  shall  by  so  doing  condemn 
those  foreign  protestant  churches,  which  differ  from 
us  in  some  of  the  same  ceremonies  as  the  dissenters 
at  home  do,  of  schism  likewise.  God  forbid  we 
should  do  that.  It  is  not  the  use  or  disuse  of  this 
or  -that  ceremony,  order,  &c.,  but  it  is  the  renouncing 
of  communion  for  such  use  or  disuse,  that  constitutes 
a  schismatic.  Now  we  and  the  foreign  protestant 
churches  do  not  do  that.  For  one  of  us,  whom 
providence  should  bring  into  their  nation,  would 
communicate  witli  them,  though  their  ceremonies 
and  ways  of  worship  are  not  altogether  the  same  as 
ours ;  and  they,  when  they  come  hither,  do  the  same 
with  us.  And  such  churches,  or  such  Christians, 
that  are  always  ready  to  do  so,  have  always  a 
communion  one  with  another  in  heart,  in  purpose, 
in  inclination  and  acknowledgment ;  which  they  are 
ready  to  bring  into  act  by  corporal  presence  and 
joining,  when  providence  makes  it  practicable.  And 
this  is,  or  ought  to  be,  the  temper  between  all 
churches  that  differ  not  in  essentials.  Now  this  is 
the  only  sense  in  which  that  saying  is  true ;  '  That 

*  there  is  no  schism,  where  the  differences  are  not 

*  in  the  fundamentals  of  religion  ;'  i.  e.  Any  two 
churches  of  different  nations  are  always  supposed 
to  be  in  communion,  and  not  in  a  schism,  so  long 


though  we  think  another  Way  better.  543 

as   they  differ  not   in   fundamentals;   because   it  is   chaf. 

XI 

supposed  that  the  members  of  one  of  tliese  would 

(in  case  they  were  to  travel  into  the  other  nation)  J^^^J 'jj^'*"" 

for  unity's  sake  communicate  with  those  other.  sties. 

But  when  people  of  the  same  place,  city,  parish, 
&c.,  do  actually  separate,  and  renounce  communion 
with  the  church  when  they  are  on  the  spot ;  this 
plea  cannot  be  used  in  their  case.  To  say,  these 
are  not  schismatics,  because  they  diifer  not  in 
fundamentals,  is  to  put  a  new  meaning  on  the 
word  schism.  They  are  not  heretics  indeed,  as 
the  church-use  has  now  distinguished  the  use  of 
those  words.  But  the  Donatists,  Novatians,  &c., 
have  been  always  counted  schismatics,  though  they 
differed  not  in  essentials. 

Those  that  differ  from  any  true  church  in  essen- 
tials, and  do  sei)arate  or  are  excommunicated  for 
such  difference,  are,  in  respect  of  their  opinions, 
more  faulty  than  those  we  have  been  speaking  of. 
But  those  that  separate  for  smaller  matters,  are,  in 
respect  of  the  mere  schism  or  separation,  (if  we 
could  abstract  that  from  the  fault  of  the  opinion,) 
the  more  faulty  of  the  two.  For  the  smaller  the 
difference  is,  the  greater  fault  and  shame  it  is  to 
make  a  breach  for  it :  and  though  the  other  be,  in 
the  main,  the  greater  sin,  yet  these  are  more  plainly 
self-condemned. 

IV.  4.  The  other  difficulty  that  I  proposed  to 
speak  of,  is  something  greater.  There  is  a  man 
that  thinks  the  church  holds  some  errors  ;  not 
fundamental  ones  indeed  ;  but  she  has  brought 
these  errors  into  her  public  service,  in  which  he 
should  join.  He  would  not  renounce  a  church  for 
holding  those  errors  in   disputable  points ;  but  he 


544  We  ought  to  johi  in  public  Worship, 

CHAP,   cannot  join  in  prayers  to  God  which  are  grounded 

XT 

'      on.  and  do  suppose  a  doctrine  which  he  judges  to  be 
Yfar  after  ^  false  or  mistaken  one. 

the  apo- 
stles. But,  1.  The  man  acknowledges  that  this  is  not  in 

matters  fundamental. 

2.  He  acknowledges  that  the  main  body  of  the 
prayers  and  service  is  such  as  all  Christians  agree  to 
be  necessary,  and  in  which  he  may  join  with  his 
mouth  and  understanding-  also. 

Suppose  then  that  there  be  some  particular  col- 
lects or  prayers,  or  clauses  of  prayers,  which  he 
thinks  to  contain  a  mistake  in  them.  May  he  not 
join  with  his  brethren  in  the  main,  and  omit  the 
adding  of  his  Amen  to  those  particular  clauses? 
Especially  since  no  man  requires  of  him  to  declare 
his  approbation  of  the  whole  and  every  part?  Is 
not  this  more  Christian-like,  than  to  fly  to  that 
dreadful  extremity  of  separation,  and  total  dis- 
owning, for  a  disputable  point,  which  may  possibly 
be  his  own  mistake  ?  And  if  the  truth  of  the 
matter  be  that  it  is  his  own  mistake ;  is  there 
any  likelier  way  to  come  to  the  knowledge  of  the 
truth,  than  by  continuing  in  the  body  of  the  church, 
where  tlie  members,  the  faithful  Christians,  do  by 
mutual  edification  help  one  another?  Ts  not  this 
the  very  counsel  of  St.  Paul,  Phil.  iii.  15,  16.  And 
if  in  any  tiling  ye  he  otherwise  minded,  God 
shall  reveal  even  this  unto  you.  Nevertheless,  [or 
however  that  be,]  whereto  we  have  already  at- 
tained, let  us  walk  by  the  same  ride,  let  us  mind 
the  same  thing?  This  last  clause  [let  us  mind  the 
same  thing']  is  in  the  sense  of  the  original,  let  us 
be  unanimous;  as   bishop  Stillingfleet*   has  shewn; 

t  Unreasonableness  of  Sepai-ation,  part  ii.  sect.  19. 


The  Cases  in  whicli  allowed  to  separate.  545 

and    he    has    at    the    same    place    largely    shewn,   chap 


XI. 


that  this  advice  of  the  apostle  is  intended  for 
this  very  purpose  to  which  I  have  here  applied  it ;  j^*^**^  ^^''^'^ 
namely,  that  such  a  man  as  we  are  here  s])eaking  of,  sties. 
should  continue  in  communion,  and  conform  to  all 
that  he  can,  and  omit  the  saying  Amen  to  what  he 
judges  a  mistake.  He  confirms  this  interpretation 
with  so  good  reasons ;  and  his  antagonist  there 
opposes  it  with  so  weak  ones,  that  it  tempts  one  to 
think  that  he  would  not  have  opposed  it  at  all,  had 
it  not  been  for  fear  that  by  this  course  the  world 
would  in  a  short  time  have  lost  the  happiness  of 
having  any  separate  sects.  If  the  reader  will  please 
to  consult  that  book,  he  will  have  no  further  need  of 
any  arguments  against  separation. 

Some  learned  protestants  (Melancthon,  Calvin, 
Bucer,  Peter  IMartyr,  and  others  of  the  first  re- 
formers) have  thought  that  in  cases  of  necessity  a 
protestant  might  join  even  in  popish  assemblies  in 
those  prayers  that  are  sound  ;  provided  he  did,  to 
avoid  scandal,  protest  against  their  superstitious 
ones.     But  I  will  not  meddle  with  that. 

The  argument  that  some  make  for  separation,  be- 
cause there  are  many  ill  men  in  the  church,  has 
been  so  plainly  answered,  that  nothing  more  need  be 
said.  Whoever  reads  St.  Paul's  Epistles  will  find 
there  were  many  scandalous  members  in  all  those 
churches,  especially  at  Corinth,  1  Cor.  v ;  2  Cor.  xii. 
20,  21  ;  and  yet  he  will  find  that  St.  Paul,  so  far  from 
advising  the  purer  sort  to  separate  from  the  church, 
does  earnestly  forbid  any  such  practice,  1  Cor.  i.  10 ; 
item  xi.  18,  &c. 

V.  4.  When  a  lawgiver  names  some  particular  ex- 
ceptions of  cases  in  which  the  law  shall  not  oblige ; 

WALL,  VOL.  II.  N  n 


546  This  Question  not  a  Fundamental. 

CHAP,  that  law  binds  the  stronsrer  in  all  other  cases  not  ex- 

XI 

cepted.     For  it  is  supposed,  if  there  had  been  any 

thrapo-^"^  more,  he  would  have  named  them  too.     The  Scrip- 
sties.         ^^,j.g  gives   a  very  positive  law   against  separations. 
It  exce])ts  some  cases.     It  is   a  very  presumptuous 
thing   to  add  any  more  to  them  of  our  own  heads. 
They  are  these : 

1.  If  a  church  do  practise  idolatry.  St.  Paul, 
warning  the  Corinthians  of  the  heathen  idolaters, 
says,  Co?ne  out  from  among  them,  and  be  ye  sepa- 
rate, 2  Cor.  vi.  17.  Though  the  popish  idolatry  be 
not  so  rank  as  that  of  those  heathens,  yet  the  gene- 
ral words  do  seem  to  reach  their  case.  But  the 
ignorant  people  among  many  sects  of  separatists, 
finding  here  the  word  separate,  do  indiscriminately 
apply  it  to  justify  separation  from  Christians  against 
whom  they  do  not  in  the  least  pretend  any  accusa- 
tion of  idolatry. 

2.  If  a  church  teach  doctrines  encouraging  any 
wickedness,  as  fornication,  &c.,  or  destructive  of  the 
fundamentals  of  the  Christian  faith.  St.  Paul  men- 
tions some,  2  Tim.  ii.  18,  that  denied  the  resurrec- 
tion and  judgment  to  come.  He  commands  Timothy 
to  shun  them ;  for  their  word  will  eat  as  doth  a 
canker. 

3.  The  Scripture  commands  that  no  sin  be  com- 
mitted to  obtain  any  purpose  never  so  good.  There- 
fore a  church  that  will  not  admit  us  without  our 
doing  a  thing  that  is  wicked,  or  declaring  and  sub- 
scribing something  that  is  false,  does  thereby  thrust 
us  out  of  her  communion.  And  the  guilt  of  the  sin 
of  separation  lies  at  her  door. 

4.  If  a  church  be  schismatical,  i.  e.  in  a  state  of 
unjustifiable    division    or    separation    from    another 


This  Question  not  a  Fimdamental .  547 

church  from  which  she  has  withdrawn  herself.     St.   chap. 

XI. 

Paul   commands,  Rom.  xvi.  17,    Mark    them    wliicli !_ 


cause    divisions    and   offences,   contrary    to    the    doc-^-^^]^^^^^^ 
trine  which  ye  have  learned,  and  avoid  them.  sties. 

These  exceptions  I  find  in  Scripture  :  and  I  know 
of  no  more  that  reach  to  churches  (particular  men 
that  live  wickedly  are  to  be  avoided  in  our  conver- 
sation, we  know).  He  that  separates  from  any 
church  upon  any  ground  except  one  of  these  four, 
ought  to  take  heed  and  be  well  assured  that  he  find 
his  ground  in  the  Scripture. 

VI.  Now  to  apply  what  has  been  said  to  the  pae- 
dobaptists  and  antipa^dobaptists  :  the  main  inquiry 
is,  whether  the  point  in  debate  between  them  be  a 
fundamental  article  of  the  Christian  faith  ;  for  if  it 
be,  they  must  indeed  separate  in  their  communion, 
and  the  guilt  will  lie  on  those  that  are  in  the  error. 
But  if  it  be  not,  there  is  not  by  the  rules  laid  down 
any  sufficient  reason  for  their  separating  or  re- 
nouncing one  another,  which  party  soever  be  in  the 
wrong. 

Now  I  think  that  such  a  question  about  the  age 
or  time  of  one's  receiving  baptism  does  not  look  like 
a  fundamental,  nor  is  so  reputed  in  the  general 
sense  of  Christians.  And  there  are  these  reasons 
why  it  should  not  be  so  accounted. 

1.  It  is  a  general  rule,  that  all  fundamental 
points  are  in  Scripture  so  plainly  and  clearly  de- 
livered, that  any  man  of  tolerable  sincerity  cannot  but 
perceive  the  meaning  of  the  holy  writers  to  be,  that 
we  should  believe  them.  Now  baptism  itself,  viz. 
that  all  that  enter  into  Christ's  church  should  be 
baptized,  is  indeed  plainly  delivered  in  Scripture : 
so  that  we   are  amazed  at   the   Quakers  and   Soci- 

N  n  2 


548  This  Question  not  a  Fundamental. 

CHAP,  iiicaus ;  the  one  for  refusing  it,  the  other  for  counting 
'      it  indifferent.     But  at    wliat    age    the    children   of 
^hra'^^'^'   Christians   should   be   baptized,   whether  in  infancy 
sties.  or  to  stay  till   the  age  of  reason,  is  not  so    clearly 

delivered,  but  that  it  admits  of  a  dispute  that  has 
considerable  perplexities  in  it :  I  mean  with  those 
that  know  not  the  history  of  the  Scripture-times, 
nor  the  force  of  some  of  the  original  words  in  Scrip- 
ture used.  There  is,  as  I  have  said,  no  plain  ex- 
ample or  instance  of  the  baptism  of  any  one  that 
had  been  born  of  Christian  parents  set  down  at  all 
either  as  received  by  him  at  full  age,  or  received  in 
infancy  :  which  would  have  been  the  surest  guide  to 
us.  None  I  mean,  that  is  plain  to  vulgar  readers  of 
the  English  translation  of  Scripture :  for  that  many 
of  the  Fathers  did  take  1  Cor.  vii.  14.  for  a  plain 
instance,  I  shewed  before.  And  for  the  commission, 
Matt,  xxviii.  19,  and  our  Saviour's  rule,  John  iii.  5, 
whether  they  are  to  be  understood  to  include  infants 
and  all,  or  only  adult  persons,  is  not  so  plain  to  the 
said  readers  as  fundamental  points  use  to  be.  God's 
providence  does  not  suffer,  that  the  understanding 
of  those  places,  upon  the  belief  of  which  the  salva- 
tion of  all,  even  the  meanest  and  most  ignorant 
Christian  does  depend,  (and  such  are  the  fundamen- 
tal articles,)  should  require  much  skill,  learning,  or 
sagacity  ;  but  only  an  honest  purpose  and  desire  to 
learn.  This  therefore  being  not  set  down  so  very 
plain,  does  not  seem  by  Scripture  to  be  such  a  fun- 
damental, as  that  we  should  be  bound  to  renounce 
communion  with  every  one  that  is  not  of  the  same 
opinion  as  we  are  about  it. 

The  Epistle   to  the  Hebrews,  ch.  vi.  1,  2,  speak- 
ing   of   some    things    which    are    styled  '  principles 


This  Question  not  a  Fundamental.  549 

of    the    oracles    of   God,'    reckons    amongst    them   chap. 

XI 

the  '  doctrine  of  baptisms,  and  of  laying  on  of  hands.' 


Now  whether  the  meaning  of  that  place  be  to  ^,j^''g/|J^^'' 
reckon  both  these,  as  things  that  must  be  believed '^t'*^'*- 
and  owned  by  all  that  shall  be  saved,  is  a  ques- 
tion that  needs  not  be  discussed  here.  For  sup- 
pose it  be ;  both  these  parties  do  own  baptism : 
they  differ  only  about  the  time  or  manner  of  re- 
ceiving it. 

2.  The  ancient  and  primitive  Christians  for  cer- 
tain did  not  reckon  this  point  among  the  funda- 
mental ones.  For  they  drew  up  short  draughts  and 
summaries  of  the  faith,  which  we  call  creeds ;  and 
into  these  they  put  all  those  articles  which  they 
thought  fundamental  or  absolutely  necessary.  Now 
though  some  churches  had  their  creeds  a  little  larger 
than  others;  and  some  councils  or  meetings  of 
Chistians  did  overdo,  in  putting  some  opinions, 
which  they  valued  more  than  need  was,  into  their 
creeds ;  yet  there  never  was  any  creed  at  all  that 
had  this  article  in  it ;  either  '  that  infants  are  to 
'  be  baptized  :'  or,  that  '  only  adult  persons  are  to  be 
'  baptized.' 

Baptism  itself  does  indeed  make  an  article  in 
several  old  creeds.  As  for  example,  in  the  Constan- 
tinopolitan,  which  is  now  received  in  all  Christen-  281. 
dom  ;  '  I  acknowledge  one  baptism  for  the  remission 
*  of  sins.'  But  the  determination  of  the  age  or  man- 
ner of  receiving  it  was  never  thought  fit  to  make  an 
article  of  faith. 

3.  As  for   particular  men   among    the    ancients, 
there  is,  I  know,  none  whom  the  antipaedobaptists 
would  so  willingly  hear  speak  as  Tertullian.     He  100. 
has  a  book  about  baptism,  wherein  he  first  speaks 


550  This  Question  not  a  Fundamental. 

CHAP,   of  the  matter,  water;  and  of  the  form  of  baptism: 


XI. 


and  then  says,  ch.  10,  'Having  now  discoursed  of 
l^r^o^'  '  ^11  things  that  make  up  the  religion  [or  essence] 
sties.  i  Qf  baptism,  I  will  proceed  to  speak  de  qucBstiuncu- 
'  lis  quihisdam,  of  some  questions  of  small  moment ;' 
and  it  is  among  those  qucBstiunculoi  that  he  treats 
concerning  the  age  of  receiving  it.  I  recited  the 
place  at  large,  part  i.  ch.  4.  ^.  %  &c. 
100.  4.  As  Tertullian  thought  it  a  question  of  lesser 
moment,  so  it  seems  the  Christians  of  that  time  and 
place  did  not  reckon  it  of  so  great  moment  as  to 
break  communion.  For  when  he  expressed  his  opin- 
ion to  be  against  the  practice  then  used  of  baptizing 
infants  ordinarily,  yet  we  do  not  find  that  he  was 
excommunicated  for  that ;  nor  at  all,  till  he  excom- 
municated himself  by  running  away  to  the  sect  of 
the  Montanists,  who  were  indeed  for  their  impi©us 
opinions  abhorred  of  all  Christians.  Whereas  if  it 
had  been  accounted  a  fundamental  article  of  faith,  he 
could  not  have  been  borne  with  in  his  denial  of  it. 
230.  5.  This  is  yet  more  clear  in  the  case  of  Gregory 
the  father  of  Gregory  Nazianzen,  who,  (if  I  com- 
puted right  at  part  i.  cb.  11.  ^.  6,  of  which  I  do 
since  that  time  make  a  question  for  the  reasons 
given  in  this  third  edition,)  had  some  children  born 
to  him  after  he  was  in  priest's  orders,  whom  he 
brought  up  with  him  in  the  house  without  baptizing 
them  ;  and  they  were  not  baptized  till  their  adult 
age.  And  yet  the  man  continued  priest,  and  after- 
ward bishop  of  that  place  till  he  died,  being  nigh 
one  hundred  years  old.  This  for  the  sense  of  the 
ancient  church. 

6.  For  the  sense  of  modern  Christians  :  first  the 
papists  of  modern  times   do    confidently  maintain, 


Both  Parties  judge  it  not  fundamental.  551 

that  there  is  no  proof  at  all  (direct  or  consequential)  ^'^^^ 
from  the  Scripture   for  infant-baptism.     And   it   is 


certain,  they  do  not  pretend  that  there  is  any  against  j|,e'*!|p^of'' 
it ;  for  their  church  as  well  as  others  does  practise  ''^'^'• 
it :  and  though  their  church  can  do  well  enough 
without  Scripture,  yet  they  would  not  have  her 
convicted  of  going  contrary  to  it.  It  follows  then 
from  their  pretence,  that  the  Scripture  is  silent  in 
the  case.  If  so,  then  it  is  a  thing  that  no  protestant 
will  account  a  fundamental,  and  consequently  will 
not  divide  for  it.  So  these  men's  arguments  will 
make  us  all  friends;  at  least  so  far  as  to  live  in 
communion  with  one  another.  The  worse  would 
be,  that  if  we  did  so,  we  should  lose  all  those  fine 
arguments  against  infant-baptism  that  come  out  in 
])opish  books  every  year.  For  they,  seeing  us  united, 
would  not  count  it  worth  their  while;  and  they 
would  then  be  as  well  content  that  there  should  be 
proof  in  Scripture  for  infant-baptism,  as  not. 

But  to  leave  these  men,  and  to  speak  of  such  as 
are  serious  in  religion :  the  most  serious  and  judi- 
cious, both  of  the  psedobaptists  and  antipoedobap- 
tists  (even  those  of  them  that  have  been  most  en- 
gaged against  each  other  in  polemical  writings, 
which  do  commonly  abate  people's  charity)  do  agree 
that  this  difference  is  not  in  the  essentials  of  reli- 
gion. Here  I  might  (if  I  had  not  been  too  long 
already)  recite  the  words  of  bishop  Taylor,  Dr. 
Hammond,  Mr.  Baxter,  Mr.  Wills,  &c.,  on  the  one 
side  ;  and  of  Mr.  Tombes,  Mr.  Stennet,  &c.,  on  the 
other.  Mr.  Stennet,  in  a  book  come  out  the  other 
day,  says";  '  If  he  [Mr.  Russen]  mean that 

u  Answer  to  Mr.  Russen,  ch.  ii.  p.  23  ;  ch.  x.  p.  215.  [It  was 
published  in  1704.] 


552  Both  Parties  judge  it  not  fundamental. 

CHAP.  <  they  [the  antipaeclobaptists]  cannot  look  upon  those 

*  that  differ   from    them,  as   Christians, the 

theapo- '  'contrary  is  well  known.'  And  again,  'Enough 
sties.  <  jj^g  been  said  before,  to  take  off  the  second  re- 
'  proach  which  he  [Mr.  Russen]  casts  on  them  [the 
'  antipaedobaptists],  viz.  that  they  judge  none  of  the 
'  true  church,  but  those  of  their  own  way.'  But  it 
is  better  to  quote  their  confessions.  In  the  first 
year  of  king  William,  one  party  of  the  antipsedo- 
baptists  [the  particulm'  men]  published  a  Confes- 
sion of  their  Faith  :  they  say,  it  is  the  same  for  sub- 
stance with  that  published  1643,  in  the  name  of 
seven  churches,  which  1  suppose  were  the  first  in 
England.  Now  they  say,  they  are  concerned  for 
'  above  a  hundred.'  They  declare  in  the  preface 
the  design  both  of  that  and  this  confession  to  be, 
'  to  manifest  their  consent  with  both  [the  presby- 
'  terians  and  independents]  in  all  the  fundamental 
'  articles  of  the  Christian  religion ;'  and,  as  they 
add  afterwards,  with  other  protestants.  It  is  plain 
then,  that  they  count  not  the  age  or  manner  of 
receiving  baptism  to  be  a  fundamental. 

And  here,  forasmuch  as  this  confession  is  but 
lately  come  to  my  hands,  I  ought  to  do  that  justice 
to  these  men,  as  to  own  that  they  do  for  their  part 
disclaim  several  of  those  opinions  which  I  at  ch.  viii. 
^.  6,  said  were  iield  by  some  of  the  English  antipse- 
dobaptists.  For  besides  that  they  give  a  full  and 
catholic  confession  of  the  doctrines  of  the  holy  Tri- 
nity, ch.  2  ;  of  Christ's  divinity  and  consubstantiality, 
ch.  8;  and  of  his  satisfaction,  ch.  8  and  11  ;  the 
denial  of  which  points  is  not  charged  on  any  church 
of  antipsedobaptists :  but  only  that  some  Socinians 
intrude  among  them,  as  they  do  every  where : — Be- 


Both  Parties  judge  it  not  fundamental.  553 

sides  these,  tbey  own  original  sin,  ch.  6.     Oaths  im-  chap. 

posed  by  authority  to  be  lawful,  eh.  23.     The  Lord's — — 

day  to  be  the  day  for  Christian  worship,  and  the  J^g*^^^*^"" 
Saturday  sabbath  to  be  abolished,  ch.  22.  Thats'i^^^- 
every  church  has  from  Christ  all  that  power  that  is 
needful  for  carrying  on  order  in  worship  and  disci- 
pline, ch.  26.  All  bishops  or  elders,  and  deacons  to 
be  ordained  by  imposition  of  hands,  ibid.  All  pastors 
to  have  a  comfortable  supply  from  the  church,  so  as 
they  need  not  be  entangled  in  secular  affairs ;  but 
may  live  of  the  Gospel,  the  people  communicating  to 
them  of  all  their  good  things,  ibid.  No  member  of 
a  church  ought  to  separate  upon  account  of  any 
offence  [or  scandal]  taken  at  any  of  their  fellow 
members,  but  to  wait  upon  Christ  in  the  further 
proceeding  of  the  church,  ibid.  In  the  Lord's  Sup- 
per the  minister  to  give  the  bread  and  wine  to  the 
communicants,  ch.  30.  So  it  seems  these  do  not 
hand  it  about  among  themselves,  as  is  said  of  some 
of  them.  Worthy  receivers  do  by  faith  'really  and 
'  indeed,'  yet  not  carnally  and  corporeally,  but  spi- 
ritually, receive  and  feed  upon  Christ  crucified, 
ibid.  Souls  do  not  die  nor  sleep ;  but  at  a  man's 
death  are  either  received  into  glory,  or  cast  into 
hell,  reserved  to  the  judgment,  ch.  31.  Civil  ma- 
gistrates to  be  obeyed  for  conscience  sake,  ch.  24. 
But  I  cannot  say  how  they  reconcile  this  with  what 
they  say,  ch.  21,  that  to  obey  out  of  conscience  any 
human  commands  not  contained  in  God's  word,  is 
to  betray  true  liberty  of  conscience.  This  needs  a 
little  explication. 

Moreover,  what  is  to  our  present  purpose,  they 
say ;  '  That  all  persons  throughout  the  world,  pro- 
'  fessing  the  faith  of  the  Gospel,  and  obedience  to 


554)  The  JntipcBdobaptists  confess  it. 

CHAP.  «  Qod  by  Christ  according  unto  it,  not  destroying 
'  their   own  profession  by  any   errors   everting  the 


sties. 


Year  after    ,    n  i    .>  it  />  i»  t 

theapo-  toundation,  or  unholniess  or  conversation,  are  and 
'  may  be  called,  visible  saints,'  ch.  26.  And  they  say 
afterward,  ch.  27,  '  That  all  these  saints  are  bound 

*  to  maintain  an  holy  fellowship  and  communion 
'  in  the  worship  of  God.'  Of  which  communion 
they  say  a  little  after,  that  '  as  God  offers  opportu- 

*  nity,  it  is  to  be  extended  to  all  the  household  of 
'faith;  even  all  those  who  in  every  place  call  upon 
'  the  name  of  the  Lord  Jesus. ' 

This  laid  together  makes  full  to  the  purpose  I  am 
speaking  of:  every  one  ought  to  continue  in  the 
communion  of  a  church  that  has  no  errors  which  do 
evert  the  foundation.  And  an  error,  or  supposed 
error,  about  the  age  or  manner  of  receiving  baptism, 
does  not  do  that,  by  their  own  confession. 

And  now  in  the  first  year^  of  her  present  majesty, 
is  published  a  draught  of  articles  by  some  antipae- 
dobaptists,  (the  same  I  guess,)  '  to  manifest  their 
'  nearness  in  union  with  other  of  her  majesty's  pro- 
'  testant  subjects.'  There  are  thirty-six  of  them. 
They  are  verbatim  (except  two  or  three  clauses  of 
no  moment)  the  same  with  thirty-six  of  the  Thirty- 
nine  Articles  of  the  Church  of  England ;  save  that 
in  the  articles  of  baptism,  they  leave  out  the  last 
clause  about  infants'  baptism.  They  come  near  to 
that  subscription  that  is  required  to  capacitate  one 
for  orders  in  that  church  :  one  would  think  then  it 
should  not  be  difficult  to  accommodate  the  matter  of 
lay-communion. 

What  has  been  said  does  in  the  whole  amount 

"  [Namely,  1702.  I  have  not  been  able  to  meet  with  this 
publication.] 


The  Antipcedohaptists  confess  it.  555 

to  this:  that  putting  the  case  that  there  were  in  chap. 
any  nation   a  number   of  believers   in  Christ,  who 


were  not  yet  settled  in  any  form  of  church-govern- J^g'^^po'^'^'' 
ment,  and  did  besides  differ  in  some  opinions  not"^*^^- 
fundamental ;  and  among  the  rest,  in  this  question 
about  infants'  baptism  ;  their  duty  would  be,  to 
unite  themselves  into  one  body  or  church,  and  not 
separate  into  parties  and  several  churches  for  that 
difference.  And  if  it  be  asked,  how  they  should 
regulate  the  order  for  public  worship  in  which  they 
were  all  to  join ;  and  particularly  whether  they 
should  allow  an  infant  brought  by  its  parents  to 
the  church  for  baptism,  to  be  there  baptized,  or  not 
allow  it ;  there  is  no  other  way  in  such  a  case,  than 
after  a  debate  by  arguments  from  Scripture  and 
reason,  to  suffer  themselves  to  be  all  determined  by 
the  major  vote,  which  major  vote  must  fix  the  rules 
of  the  national  church  there  to  be  settled :  and  the 
minor  part,  who  would  have  had  some  things  to 
have  been  otherwise  oj-dered,  must  comply  with 
their  brethren,  and  join  in  all  things  that  they  can, 
and  by  no  means  make  a  division.  If  the  premises 
that  have  been  laid  down,  be  looked  upon  as  proved, 
they  do  certainly  enforce  this  conclusion. 

For  any  man  to  say  in  this  case,  the  Scripture, 
and  not  the  major  vote,  should  determine,  is  fri- 
volous. Because  it  is  presupposed  in  the  case,  that 
it  is  about  the  meaning  of  Scripture,  and  about  the 
force  of  the  consequences  and  arguments  drawn 
from  Scripture,  that  they  differ ;  and  the  Scripture 
itself  directs  them,  that  in  such  differences  not  fun- 
damental, they  should  close  and  unite  as  well  as 
they  can,  and  bear  with  one  another. 

Now  to  apj>ly  tliis  to  the  state  of  religion  as  it  is 


556  One  of  either  side  may  join  loith 

CHAP,    now,  when  there  are  in  all  places  national  churches 

XI 

'  already  settled,  one  ought,  in  order  to  lay  the  ba- 
the^a  ^^*"  lance  even  between  the  psedobaptists  and  antipaedo- 
sties.  baptists,  to  suppose  or  imagine  a  thing  that  is  not, 

but  may  easily  be  supposed  ;  and  that  is,  that  there 
were  some  national  church  or  churches  of  antipse- 
dobaptists  in  the  world.  And  suppose  a  number  of 
Christians,  paedobaptists  in  their  opinion,  were  by 
providence  brought  to  live  in  one  of  those  places;  the 
question  is,  whether  they  ought  to  join  in  commu- 
nion with  the  church  of  antip^edobaptists  there 
established,  or  make  a  separate  body  renouncing 
communion  with  them.  I  think  it  follows,  from 
the  rules  of  Scripture  that  have  been  laid  down, 
that  they  ought  to  join  with  them.  And  I  do  not 
stick  to  declare,  that  if  I  Avere  one  of  those  new 
comers,  I  would  do  it,  for  one.  So  that  I  advise 
them  to  nothing  in  respect  to  their  joining  the 
church  here,  but  what  I  think  were  to  be  done  by 
us  if  we  were  in  their  case.  I  mean,  I  would  do 
thus ;  since  my  opinion  is,  that  infants  ought  to  be 
baptized,  I  would  get  my  own  children  baptized 
by  all  means  possible ;  but  when  that  were  done, 
I  would  nevertheless  continue  to  join  in  public 
prayers,  hearing,  receiving  the  communion,  &c.,  with 
them,  if  they  would  admit  me  ;  if  they  rejected  me 
for  my  opinion,  the  guilt  of  that  breach  would  lie 
on  them,  and  not  on  me.  It  is  not  an  antipaedo- 
baptist  or  other  dissenter  in  o})inion  that  one  is  not 
to  communicate  with  :  it  is  a  schismatic  or  divider 
that  one  is  not  to  communicate  with.  And  whereas 
some  pa'dobaptist  will  say  to  me ;  '  You  seem  by 
'  this  putting  of  the  case  to  make  the  opinions 
'  equal  ;  theirs  to  be  as  good  as  ours :  and  that  it  is 


a  National  Church  of  the  other.  557 

'  only  by  the  majority  that  we  have  the  advantage:'  chap. 
I  do  not  so  ;  but  this  I  say,  the  difference  is  not  in 


fundamentals.  And  therefore,  if  thou  be  strono^  y^''^^^'^'' 
and  they  be  weak ;  thou  wise,  and  they  foolish ;  "ties. 
thy  opinion  rational,  theirs  silly ;  yet  we  are  still 
(or  ought  to  be,  for  all  the  difference  of  opinions) 
members  of  the  same  body,  and  brethren.  IMen 
are  not  to  be  cut  off  for  mistaken  opinions  that  are 
consistent  with  true  faith.  Indeed  if  they  will  cut 
off  themselves,  there  is  no  help  for  that.  When  a 
church  loses  its  members,  and  they  part  from  her 
as  limbs  from  a  body,  there  is  that  to  be  said  which 
is  commonly  said  of  a  husband  and  wife  parting: 
there  is  certainly  a  great  fault  somewhere ;  but  there 
is  commonly  some  fault  on  both  sides. 

Now  to  lay  aside  supposals,  and  to  take  the  state 
of  religion  as  it  is  now  in  the  world  :  there  is  no 
national  church  in  the  world  (and  I  think  never 
was)  but  what  are  pa?dobaptists.  All  that  are  of 
the  other  way,  are  such  as  have  within  the  last  two 
centuries  made  a  separation  from  the  established 
churches  of  the  places  where  they  are  :  as  I  made 
appear,  ch.  8.  The  reasons  that  I  have  laid  down 
from  Scripture  do  require  that  they  should  return 
to  unity  of  communion  in  those  things  wherein  all 
Christians  are  agreed  :  and  they  may  continue  to 
argue  in  a  charitable  way  about  the  opinion  till  one 
side  be  satisfied,  or  till  they  are  weary.  This  is  the 
best  way  to  save  their  souls,  whatever  become  of  the 
opinion. 

To  speak  of  the  case  of  England  in  particular. 
They  know  themselves  that  it  is  a  separation  begun 
less  than  eighty  years  ago,  as  I  shew  at  ch.  viii.  ^.  6. 
Any  very  ancient  man  may  remember  when  there 


658  Schism  a  reigning  Sin  in  England. 

CHAP,  was  no  Englishmen,  or  at  least  no  society  or  church 

^^'      of  them,  of  that  persuasion.     They  at  first  held  the 

Year  after  opinion    without    separatiufiT    for    it.      Their    eldest 

the  apo-  ^  1  o 

Bties.  separate  churches  are  not  yet  of  the  age  of  a  man, 
viz.  seventy  years.  I  mean  the  ancient  men  or 
men  of  reading  among  them  know  this ;  the  young 
and  vulgar,  who  will  talk  right  or  wrong  for  a 
side,  do  not  own  it ;  but  the  others  own  it,  and 
they  justify  it  by  pleading  that  their  opinion  is  the 
truest :  which  plea,  supposing  it  to  be  true,  will 
not  in  a  conscience  that  is  guided  by  God's  word, 
justify  a  separation. 

Let  us  put  the  case  of  an  antipsedobaptist,  or 
other  dissenter,  that  is  never  so  sure  that  he  is  in 
the  right,  and  that  the  church's  opinion  is  absurd, 
inconvenient,  foolish,  &c.,  or  any  thing  that  he 
pleases  to  call  it,  so  he  do  not  call  it  idolatry,  or 
heresy,  or  '  an  error  which  does  evert  the  founda- 
'  tion.'  And  yet,  by  their  own  principles  before 
laid  down,  communion  is  to  be  continued.  Let 
the  man,  when  he  is  got  into  one  of  his  severest 
fits  of  judging  his  brethren  of  the  church,  imagine 
them  speaking  to  him,  in  the  words  of  St.  Paul  to 
some  Christians  at  Corinth  y,  who  were  the  most 
conceited  and  dividing  people  that  he  ever  had  to 
do  with  ;  Ye  are  full,  ye  are  rich.  We  are  fools 
for  Chrisfs  sake,  but  ye  are  tvise  ifi  Christ :  we 
are  weak,  but  ye  are  strong:  ye  are  honourable,  bid 
we  are  despised.  Yet  receive  us ;  do  not  reject  our 
communion  in  all  things,  because  we  err  in  some 
things.  Or,  as  he  says  in  another  place,  If  you  thiiik 
me  a  fool,  yet  as  a  fool  receive  me. 

There  are  several  good  books  written  purposely 

y    t  Cor.  iv.  8,  TO  ;    2  Cor.  vii.  2.  it.  xi.  17. 


Schism  a  reigning  Sin  in  England.  559 

on   this   subject,  and  directed   to  the  antipaedobap-  chap. 

XT 

tists,  to   shew  that,   supposing  their  opinion  to  be  ' 


true,  yet  their  schism   is  a  sin:  and  that  by  men Y^'^'' ^^'^"^ 

•'  _  ^  •'  the  apo- 

of  both  the  opinions.  One  that  is  not  rash,  but  sties, 
desires  to  guide  his  conscience  warily,  will  at  least 
read  and  weigh  what  they  say.  Mr.  Tombes,  who 
continued  an  antipaedobaptist  to  his  dying  day,  yet 
as  I  am  told^,  wrote  against  separation  for  it ;  and 
for  communion  Avith  the  parish  churches.  I  have 
not  seen  that  book  ;  but  this  I  have  seen%  that 
where  he  defends  his  opinion  against  IMarshal,  and 
where  Marshal  had  said,  '  The  teachers  of  this 
'  opinion,  wherever  they  prevail,  take  their  prose- 

*  lytes  wholly  off  from  the  ministry  of  the  word, 
'  and  sacraments,  and  all  other  acts  of  Christian 
'  communion  both  public  and  private,  from  any  but 
'  those  that  are  of  their  own  opinion.'  To  this 
Tombes  answers ;  '  This  is  indeed  a  wicked  prac- 
'  tice,  justly  to  be  abhorred  :  the  making  of  sects 
'  upon  difference  of  opinion,  reviling,  separating  from 
'  their  teachers  and  brethren  otherwise  faithful,  be- 

*  cause  there  is  not  the  same  opinion  in  disputable 
'  points,  or  in  clear  truths  not  fundamental,  is  a  thing 
'  too  frequent  in  all  sorts  of  dogmatists,  &c.  I  look 
'  upon  it  as  one  of  the  great  plagues  of  Christianity. 
'  You  shall  have  me  join  with  you  in  shewing  my 
'  detestation  of  it.  Yet  nevertheless,  first  it  is  to 
'  be  considered  that  this  is  not  the  evil  of  antipgedo- 
'  baptism,  (you  confess  some  are  otherwise  minded,) 
'  and  therefore  must  be  charged  on  the  persons,  not 

*  on  the  assertion  itself.     And  about  this,  what  they 

z  Baxter,  Reply  to  Hutchinson,  [i.  e.   Review  of  the  State  of 
Christian  Infants,  &c.  8°.  1676.] 

»  Tombes'  Examen  of  Marshal's  Sermon,  p.  31. 


560  Schism  a  reigning  Sin  in  England. 

CHAP.  '  hold,   you   may  have   now    [the]    best   satisfaction 
'. —  '  from  the  Confession  of  Faith  in  the  Name  of  Seven 


}l,Tl^t'  '  Churches  of  them,  Art.  33,  &c.'     And  accordingly 
sties.         ^j.  Tombes  himself  continued  in  communion  with 
the  church  till  he  died. 

Mr.  Baxter,  who  has  wrote  more  books  than  any 
man  in  England  against  the  opinion,  yet  has  also 
wrote  more  against  the  dividing  for  it,  and  has 
made  many  wishes  and  proposals  for  accommoda- 
tions of  both  sides  joining  in  public  communion ; 
especially  in  his  latter  books,  and  in  the  history  of 
his  own  life,  when  he  had  lived  to  see  the  great 
mischief  that  schisms  do  to  religion  and  all  piety. 
I  will  mention  only  one  passage,  wherein  he  recom- 
mends to  the  antipa^dobaptists  two  books,  useful 
to  give  them  a  true  state  of  the  question  about 
the  unlawfulness  of  separation.  '  I  am,'  says  he^ 
*  not  half  so  zealous  to  turn  men  from,  the  opinion 
'  of  anabaptistry,  as  I  am  to  persuade  both  them 
'  and  others  that  it  is  their  duty  to  live  together 
'  with  mutual  forbearance,  in  love  and  church- 
'  communion,  notwithstanding  such  differences :  for 
'  which  they  may  see  more  reasons  given,  by  one 
'  that  was  once  of  their  mind  and  way,  (Mr.  William 
'  Allen,  in  his  Retractation  of  Separation,  and  his 
'  Persuasive  to  Unity,)  than  any  of  them  can  soundly 
'  refel,  though  they  may  too  easily  reject  them.' 
But  then  Mr.  Baxter  gives  there  a  marginal  note, 
telling  the  antipsedobaptists,  '  Satan  will  not  con- 
'  sent  that  you  should  soberly  read  the  books.' 
Now  methinks  an  antipaedobaptist  that  is  desirous 

^  Confutation  of  Forgeries  of  H.  D.  sect.  2.  c.  2.  §.  13.  [in 
his  '  Moi-e  Proofs  of  Infants'  church-membership,'  &c.,  8°.  1675. 
page  221.] 


Schism  a  reicjning  Sin  in  England.  561 

to  direct  his  conscience  aright  in  so  weighty  a  mat-  chap. 
ter  as  separation  is,  shonld   not  let  Satan   have  his 


Year  after 


will   altogether  ;  bnt  should  read   such  books,  and  tiie^apo. 
consider  them  at  least,  whether  Satan  will  consent  *^^'^*- 
or  not. 

This  I  will  own,  in  excuse  of  the  English  anti- 
paedobaptists  that  do  so  divide  ;  that  it  is  a  harder 
thing  to  repent  of  the  sin  of  schism  in  England, 
than  it  is  any  where  else.  For  the  commonness  of 
any  sin  does  in  unthinking  minds  wonderfully  abate 
the  sense  of  the  guilt  of  it.  When  drunkenness  is 
grown  common,  and  almost  universal,  one  can  hardly 
persuade  an  ordinary  man  that  it  is  a  thing  that 
will  bring  damnation  on  his  soul;  because  he  sees 
almost  all  the  neighbourhood,  and  among  them  such 
a  gentleman,  or  such  a  lord,  as  much  concerned  in 
that  as  he.  So  an  antipa^dobaptist  thinks,  What- 
ever my  opinion  be,  the  separation  for  it  can  be  no 
great  fault ;  for  the  presbyterians,  and  other  parties 
of  men,  do  that  as  well  as  we,  and  for  lesser  differ- 
ences. If  we  have  taken  those  opinions  which  our 
ancestors  held  without  separating,  and  have  made  a 
separate  religion  out  of  them,  it  is  but  what  the 
others  did  before  us  :  for  they  have  taken  the  opin- 
ions which  the  old  puritans  had,  and  (though  the 
puritans  could  not)  yet  they  have  made  good  Brown- 
ism  out  of  them.  And  so  for  other  parties.  Now 
this  humour  of  dividing  is  nowhere  in  the  world 
so  common  as  it  is  in  England,  (at  least  if  we  ex- 
cept the  country  I  spoke  of  before,)  nor  the  sin  of 
schism  so  little  feared,  I  mean  of  late  years.  The 
reason  why  the  same  texts  of  Scripture  against 
schism,  division,  heresy,  &c.,  being  read  by  the  pro- 
testants  of  other  nations,  do  create  in  their  minds  a 

WALL,    VOL.  II.  O  O 


56^  Schism  a  reigning  Sin  in  England. 

CHAP,   horror  of  it,  but  being  read  by  an  Englishman,  do 
lose  their  force  with  him,  is,  because  he  has  been 


^^qI.^IT'^  born  and  bred  in  a  nation  where  that  is  so  common, 
sties.  2i\iA  practised  by  men  that  are  in  other  things  so 
conscientious,  that  he  is  apt  to  put  any  forced 
sense  on  the  words,  rather  than  think  that  that 
text  of  St.  Paul,  for  example,  Rom.  xvi.  17,  is  to  be 
taken  as  the  words  sound ;  though  there  is  (if  a 
man  desire  plain  Scripture)  not  a  plainer  text  in  the 
whole  Bible.  But  the  word  of  God  and  his  law  is 
not  like  human  laws,  that  it  should  lose  its  edge  by 
the  multitude  of  offenders.  God  will  not  punish 
any  sin  less,  I  doubt  he  will  punish  it  more,  for 
having  been  a  common  or  reigning  one. 

Some  people  also  have  so  slightly  considered  the 
commands  of  God,  that  they  think  nothing  to  be  a 
sin,  but  what  they  see  punished  by  the  secular  laws. 
And  so  because  some  Christian  nations  (whereof 
England  does  of  late  make  one)  have  thought  fit  to 
grant  an  impunity  to  schismatics  for  some  rea- 
sons of  state,  and  to  tolerate  (though  not  approve 
of)  churches  or  societies  renouncing  communion 
with  the  established  church  of  the  place,  they  are 
apt  to  think  that  God  also  does  allow  of  the  same, 
which  will  be  true  when  God  in  his  judgment  will 
think  fit  to  regulate  himself  by  statute  laws.  But 
till  that  be,  it  is  certain  by  God's  word  that  either 
'^  such  a  church,  or  else  those  that  renounce  her  com- 
munion, are  schismatics :  either  the  one  for  giving 
just  causes  to  the  others  to  separate  from  her ;  or 
else  the  others  for  separating  without  just  cause. 
It  is  certain  also,  that  if  any  church  should  so  far 
comply  with  reasons  of  state  or  human  laws,  as  to 
teach,    that    schism    (however   by   them   tolerated) 


it 


^y^- 


The  Difficulties  accommodated.  563 

is  not  sin    before   God;    this  very    doctrine    would  chap. 

XI 

indeed  be  a  good  reason  for  any  pious  Christian  to 


separate  from  her :  and  that,  by  the  second  of  the  ^^^''^  ^^^f"" 
exceptions  I  gave  just  now.  So  gross  is  that  notion,  sties. 
to  think  that  separation  is  therefore  no  sin,  because 
men's  laws  may  at  some  times  forbear  to  inflict  any 
temporal  punishment  on  it.  But  yet  as  gross  as  it 
is,  it  is  made  to  serve  for  an  excuse  to  the  con- 
sciences of  many  ignorant  people.  Partly  this  rea- 
son, and  partly  the  commonness  of  the  sin,  have 
made,  that  many  men's  consciences  do  no  longer 
accuse  them  for  it. 

VII.  There  may  need  a  few  words  also  concern- 
ing the  difficulties  that  do  lie  in  the  way  of  the  union 
that  I  have  here  proposed.  They  are  none  of  them 
such,  but  what  may,  I  hope,  be  accommodated,  if 
the  parties  be  willing.  Some  of  them  do  lie  on  the 
part  of  the  church  in  receiving  these  men  :  and  some 
on  the  part  of  the  men  themselves,  in  respect  of 
their  acceptance  of  the  communion  offered  them.  I 
know  of  but  two  on  each  part. 

On  the  church's  part,  one  concerns  the  bishop  of 
the  diocese  chiefly :  the  other,  both  the  bisho])  and 
the  curate  of  the  parish.  In  speaking  of  which,  the 
nature  of  the  thing  shews  that  I  ought  to  submit 
what  I  shall  say  to  the  judgment  of  the  parties 
concerned  :  which  I  declare  that  I  do  unfeignedly.  I 
will  only  propose  the  question,  leaving  the  determi- 
nation to  them. 

1.  Suppose  a  man  do  understand  the  nature  and 
necessity  of  the  church-union  I  have  been  speaking 
of;  and  accordingly  does  desire  to  continue,  or  to 
be,  a  member  of  the  established  church :  but  he  is 
not  satisfied  or  the  validity  oi  sufiicieiicy  of  baptism 

0  o  2 


564<  The  Difficulties,  such  as  may 

CHAP,  given  in  infancy,  or  of  baptism  given  by  sprinkling 
or  pouring  of  water  on  the  face  only ;  and  therefore 


th^a  o^*^^*^  he  (though  perhaps  baptized  in  infancy,  yet)  has 
sties.  procured  himself  to  be  baptized  anew  :  and  besides, 
he  eannot  consent  to  bring  his  children,  if  he  have 
any,  to  be  baptized  in  infancy ;  but  reserves  them 
to  adult  baptism  :  but  in  other  things  he  is  willing 
to  be  conformable  to  the  rules  of  the  church,  and 
very  desirous  of  the  communion  thereof.  This  man 
is,  I  suppose,  by  the  rules  of  the  Church  of  Eng- 
land, liable  to  be  presented  for  his  fault,  both  in 
receiving  a  second  baptism,  (for  so  it  is  in  the  esteem 
of  the  Church,)  and  in  not  bringing  his  children  to 
baptism. 

Here  is  one  evasion,  or  salvo,  which  I  scorn  to 
make  use  of,  as  being  not  satisfactory  to  myself: 
viz.  that  the  Church's  hands  are  tied  up  from  any 
proceedings  in  any  cases  of  that  nature,  by  the  act 
of  toleration.  Because  I  think  there  is  nothina; 
more  certain  than   what  bishop  Stillingfleet  says  '^ ; 

*  However  the  church  in  some  respects  be  incorpo- 

*  rated  with  the  commonwealth  in  a  Christian  state, 
'  yet  its  fundamental  rights  remain  distinct  from  it : 
'  of  which  this  is  one  of  the  chief,  to  receive  into 
'  and  exclude  out  of  the  Church  such  persons  which, 

*  according  to  the  laws  of  a  Christian  society,  are  fit 

*  to  be  taken  in  or  shut  out.'  It  is  temporal  punish- 
ments only  which  those  temporal  laws  design  to  set 
aside.     Yet  this  I  will  say ;  that  by  the  general  for- 

c  Answer  to  N.  O.  §.  15.  p.  267.  [See  '  An  answer  to  several 
'  treatises  occasioned  by  a  book,  entitled  "  A  Discourse  concern- 
'  ing  the  Idolatry  practised  in  the  Church  of  Rome." '  80.  Lon- 
don, 1673:  again,  1674:  or,  in  Stillingfleet's  Works,  folio, 
vol.  v.] 


he  accommodated.  565 

bearance  that  is  now  used,  it  is  ten  to  one  whether  chap. 

XI 

such  a  person  would  be  presented.     But  we  will  put      ' 
the  hardest  of  the   case,  and   suppose    him    to    be  ^^j^^^^ '^^^^'^ 
presented.  sties. 

He  is  then  warned  to  appear  before  the  bishop  at 
the  church-court.  He  pleads,  we  will  suppose, 
conscience  for  his  doing  or  refusing  the  things 
mentioned.  The  bishop  exhorts  him,  shews  him 
reasons,  endeavours  to  satisfy  his  doubts,  &c.,  or 
perhaps  deputes  some  persons  to  discourse  at  leisure 
more  largely  with  him  concerning  them.  If  by 
these  means  the  man  be  satisfied,  all  is  well.  But 
we  must  put  the  case  that  he  be  not.  Here  the 
question  is,  whether  the  bishop  in  such  a  case  will 
proceed  to  excommunication,  or  use  a  forbearance. 
I  suppose  he  will  make  a  difference  of  the  tempers 
of  men.  If  such  a  man  do  shew  a  temper  heady, 
fierce,  obstinate,  self-opinionated,  and  self-willed ; 
and  a  contempt  of  the  court,  and  of  all  that  is  said 
to  him  ;  he  is  hardly  a  fit  member  of  any  church. 
But  if  there  appear  the  signs  of  a  meek,  humble, 
and  Christian  disposition,  willing  to  hear  and  con- 
sider the  reasons  and  advices  given  ;  such  a  case 
deserves  the  greater  forbearance.  And  though  the 
law  requires  three  several  admonitions,  yet  it  does  not, 
I  suppose,  limit  the  bishop  to  three,  nor  to  any  num- 
ber. And  if  this  forbearance  continue  long ;  the 
man's  children  will  be  grown  up,  so  as  to  be  bap- 
tized, as  he  would  have  them,  upon  their  own  pro- 
fession. And  if  he  desire,  or  be  but  willing,  that  it 
be  done  by  dipping ;  the  church  does  comply  with 
his  desire,  and  does  advise  it  in  the  first  place. 
And  so  the  dispute  will  be  over.  If  the  bishop  do 
excommunicate  him  before  he  be  convinced,  or  this 


566  The  Difficulties,  all  such  as  may 

CHAP.  t>e  done,  then  indeed  I  have  no  more  to  say  on  this 

^^'      head  :  there  is  a  full  stop  put  to  the  proposal.     But 

Year  after  there  are  these  reasons  to  think  that  it  would  not 

the  apo- 
stles, be  SO  : 

First,  I  never  heard  of  that  done  :  but  several 
times  the  contrary.  All  the  antipa^dobaptists,  or 
indeed  other  dissenters,  that  I  have  known  excom- 
municated, have  been  excommunicated,  not  for  their 
opinion,  but  their  refusal  of  communion,  or  for 
contempt  in  refusing  to  come  at  all  to  the  bishop's 
court. 

2.  INIr.Tombes  (and  several  others,  but  I  will 
name  only  him,  because  his  case  is  generally  known) 
continued  in  communion  in  the  church  of  Salisbury 
all  the  latter  part  of  his  life.  And  though  he  during 
that  time  owned  his  opinion,  and  wrote  for  it,  yet 
because  he  desired  to  make  no  schism  of  it,  he  was 
not  disturbed  in  his  communicating  with  the  church. 
Nor  has  that  church  ever  been  blamed  for  receiving 
him.  On  the  contrary,  the  example  has  been 
spoken  of  with  commendation  in  a  very  public 
way.  This  shews  it  to  be  practicable  :  and  if  it  be 
so ;  then. 

Thirdly,  There  is  a  great  and  manifest  advantage 
in  it.  For  it  prevents  a  schism,  which  otherwise 
would  be.  The  man  continuing  in  communion,  all 
things  will  tend  to  an  accommodation  :  whereas  in  a 
separation  every  thing  is  aggravated  to  the  widen- 
ing of  the  gap,  as  we  see  by  constant  and  woful 
experience.  A  separate  party  never  thinks  itself  far 
enough  oiF  from  any  terms  of  reconciliation. 

The  second  difficulty,  which  concerns,  as  I  said, 
both  the  bishop  and  the  curate,  is  this.  By  the 
order  of  the  church  of  England,  no  person  is  to  be 


he  accommodated.  567 

admitted  to  partake  of  the  holy  communion  till  he  be  ^  ^  ^• 

confirmed,  or  be  ready  and  desirous  to  be  confirmed. 

And  a  qualification  required  of  every  person  before  he  the  apo- 
be  brought  to  the  bishop  to  be  confirmed  is,  that  he'*'^^*^*' 
have  learned  (or,  as  it  is  expressed  in  another  place, 
can  answer  to)  the  questions  of  the  Catechism.  Now 
in  that  Catechism  there  happens  to  be  a  mention  of 
infants  being  baptized.  For  after  that  it  has  de- 
clared that  baptism  is  to  be  given  upon  a  covenant  of 
faith  and  repentance,  it  follows ;  '  Qii.  Why  then 
'  are  infants  baptized,  when  by  reason  of  their  ten- 
'  der  age  they  cannot  perform  them?  Answ.  Be- 
'  cause  they  promise  them  both  by  their  sureties : 
'  which  promise,  when  they  come  to  age,  themselves 
'  are  bound  to  perform.'  Now  this  man  being  asked 
that  question  would  not  make  that  answer:  but 
would  say,  they  ought  not  to  be  baptized  till  they 
can  perform  them. 

But  besides,  that  one  may  answer  here  (much  as 
in  the  other  case)  that  the  practice  is  such,  that  not 
half  the  people  that  come  to  the  communion  are 
asked  whether  they  have  been  confirmed,  or  not : 
and  also,  that  those  who  come  to  be  confirmed  when 
they  are  of  the  age  of  a  man,  are  seldom  or  never 
examined  in  the  questions  of  the  Catechism,  provided 
it  does  by  other  ways  suflficiently  appear  that  they 
do  understand  the  principles  of  religion  ;  the  ques- 
tions as  they  stand  in  the  Catechism  being  seldom 
put  but  only  to  children.  Besides  this,  I  say,  it  ap- 
pears to  have  been  the  meaning  of  the  Church  in  that 
question  and  answer,  not  to  determine  this  point, 
whether  infants  are  to  be  baptized  (of  which  no  En- 
glishman at  that  time  made  any  doubt) :  but  to  deter- 
mine this  point ;  whether  infants  that  are  baptized. 


568  The  Difficulties  accommodated. 

CHAP,   are  baptized  upon  any  other  covenant  than  that  upon 
^^'      which   grown   persons  are  baptized,  viz.  of  repent- 


Year  after  ance   and  faith.     And  it  determines  that  they  are 

the  apo- 

gties.  not  baptized  on  any  other,  but  the  very  same :  only 

with  this  difference  ;  that  an  adult  person  is  bap- 
tized into  the  hopes  of  the  kingdom  of  heaven,  inas- 
much as  he  does  believe  ;  and  an  infant  is  baptized 
into  the  same,  on  condition  that  he  do,  when  he 
comes  to  age,  believe.  And  this  indeed  is  a  princi- 
ple very  necessary  to  be  rightly  understood.  For  a 
mistake  herein  might  hinder  those  who  are  bap- 
tized in  infancy  from  understanding  the  obligation 
that  lies  on  them  to  faith  and  obedience,  as  ever 
they  hope  to  partake  of  the  kingdom  of  heaven  :  to 
prevent  which  mistake  this  clause  of  the  Catechism 
seems  to  have  been  inserted.  So  that  though  the 
Church  do  here  suppose  indeed,  or  take  it  for  granted, 
that  infants  are  generally  baptized ;  yet  that  is  not 
the  thing  which  she  here  defines :  not  that  they  are 
to  be  baptized  ;  but  why  (or  upon  what  terms)  they 
are  baptized.  And  this  is  a  thing  which  an  anti- 
psedobaptist  holds  as  firmly  as  any  man  ;  that  all 
baptism  is  to  be  upon  this  covenant.  And  he  will 
readily  assent  to  this  ;  that  supposing  or  taking  it 
for  granted  that  infants  were  to  be  baptized,  they 
must  be  understood  to  be  baptized  on  that  covenant, 
viz.  to  enjoy  the  kingdom  of  heaven,  on  condition 
they  do,  when  they  come  to  age,  perform  the  duties 
of  faith  and  repentance. 

And  since  this  is  the  substance  of  what  the  Cate- 
chism there  teaches,  and  the  Catechism  was  intended, 
not  to  determine  controversies,  but  to  teach  funda- 
mental principles  ;  I  believe  that  the  bishops  would 
not  refuse  to  confirm  such  a  person,  (otherwise  sound 


The  Difficulties  accommodated.  569 

in  the  faith  and  conformable,  and  desirous  of  com-  chap. 
munion,)   though   he   should   own  his    sense  in  his 


answer  to  that  question  of  the  Catechism.     This  I  year  after 

^  the  apo- 

think;  but  I  end  this  discourse,  wherein  the  autho-s'ies. 
rity  of  the  church  is  concerned,  as  I  began  it ;  viz. 
in   submitting  my  opinion  to  theirs,  and  leaving  it 
to  themselves  to  determine  whether  they  would  or 
not,  or  ought  or  not. 

There  are  on  the  antipaedobaptist's  part,  concern- 
ing his  acceptance  of  communion  with  the  Church, 
these  two  difficulties. 

Some  men  of  that  way  do  think,  that  all  such  as 
have  no  other  baptism  but  what  was  given  in  in- 
fancy and  by  affusion,  are  no  Christians ;  and  that 
to  bid  them  hold  communion  with  such,  is  as  much 
as  to  bid  them  hold  it  with  heathens.  I  hope  there 
are  not  many  such  :  and  Mr.  Stennet  reckons  it  a 
slander  on  the  antipcedobaptists.  And  I  am  glad  to 
find  by  his  discourse  that  he  is  cordial  in  the  abhor- 
rence of  so  unchristian  a  notion.  And  therefore  I 
shall  say  the  less  of  it ;  having  a  natural  antipathy 
against  talking  with  any  one  whose  principles  are 
so  desperately  uncharitable  as  this  comes  to.  What 
I  said  before,  §.  6,  to  shew  that  this  difference  about 
the  age  or  manner  of  receiving  baptism  is  not  a  fun- 
damental one,  is  applicable  here.  Let  a  man  that 
has  this  thought  first  read  that,  and  then  let  him 
consider  further,  what  becomes  of  the  church  of 
Christ  at  this  rate.  Will  he  think  that  Christ  has 
had  no  church  but  in  those  few  times  and  places 
where  this  opinion  has  prevailed  ?  Peter  of  Clugny 
(whom  I  quoted  part  ii.  ch.  7.  ^.  5.)  urges  the 
Petrobrusians  with  this  dreadful  consequence  five 
or  six   hundred    years    ago,   that    if  infant-baptism 


570  The  Difficulties  accommodated. 

CHAP,  be  not  valid,  there  had   been  never  a  Christian  in 

XI 

'      Europe  for  three  or  five  hundred  years  before  :  and 

l^el^oT^  that  account  is  much  increased  now. 

sties.  -j-j^e  sophisters  in  logic  have  a  way  by  which,  if  a 

man  do  hold  any  the  least  error  in  philosophy,  they 
will  by  a  long  train  of  consequences  prove  that  he 
denies  the  first  maxims  of  common  sense.  And 
some  would  bring  that  spiteful  art  into  religion; 
whereby  they  will  prove  him  that  is  mistaken  in 
any  the  least  point,  to  be  that  antichrist  who  denies 
the  Father  and  the  Son.  If  the  psedobaptist  be 
mistaken,  or  the  antipsedobaptist  be  mistaken  ;  yet 
let  them  not  make  heathens  of  one  another.  The 
denial  of  the  Quakers  to  be  Christians,  those  of 
them  I  mean  that  do  believe  the  Scriptures,  has  such 
a  dreadful  consequence  with  it ;  that  one  would  not 
willingly  admit  it,  (though  they  do  deny  all  bap- 
tism,) because  they  do  however  profess  that  which 
is  the  chief  thing  signified  and  intended  by  baptism. 
But  since  both  the  parties  we  speak  of  now,  do  own 
the  religion  professed  in  baptism,  and  do  also  both 
use  the  outward  sign ;  supposing  that  one  side  do 
err  in  the  mode  of  it  or  the  age  of  receiving  it :  to 
conclude  thence  that  they  are  no  Christians,  is  the 
property  of  one  that  knows  not  what  spirit  he  is  of. 
To  receive  baptism  one's  self  in  that  way  which  one 
thinks  the  fittest,  is  one  case :  but  it  is  another,  and 
very  different  case,  to  judge  all  those  to  condemna- 
tion that  have  received  it  another  way.  Who  art 
thou  that  judgest  another  marCs  servant  f  I  know 
that  the  antipsedobaptists  do  not  admit  to  the  Lord's 
Supper,  when  it  is  administered  by  themselves,  any 
but  what  are  baptized  in  their  way.  But  I  speak 
now  of  one  that  is  to  receive  it,  not  to  administer  it : 


The  Difficulties  accommodated.  571 

he  that  receives  it  has  no  charge  on  his  soul  of  the   chap 
way  in  which  those  that  receive  with  him  have  been 


baptized.     But  I  have  said  more  than  is,  I  hope,  J^^^^p^*^*^"" 
needful  on  this  head.  ^^^^^' 

The  Confession,  which  I  mentioned  before,  of  one 
hundred  churches  of  antipsedobaptists,  does  not  say, 
that  only  the  adult  are  capable  of  baptism :  it  says 
but  thus ;  '  they  are  the  only  proper  subjects  ot 
'  this  ordinance  ^ ;'  and  they  do  not  say,  that  im- 
mersion is  necessary  to  the  administration ;  but 
*  that  it  is  necessary  to  the  due  administration  of 
'  it.'  I  mentioned  at  ch.  v.  ^.  6.  how  the  Chris- 
tians of  Africa  and  of  Europe  differed  as  much  as 
this  comes  to,  in  their  opinion  of  the  validity  of 
baptism  given  by  schismatics :  insomuch  that  the 
Africans  baptized  anew  any  schismatic  that  came 
over  to  the  church ;  the  Europeans  did  not  so.  But 
yet  these  churches  did  not  break  communion  for 
this  difference.  A  presbyter  or  bishop  of  Africa, 
coming  to  Rome,  joined  in  communion ;  though 
there  must  needs  be,  in  the  congregations  there, 
several  who,  according  to  his  notion  of  the  due  way 
of  baptizing,  were  not  duly  baptized  ;  and  whom 
he,  if  he  had  had  the  admitting  of  them  into  his 
own  church  in  Africa,  would  have  baptized  anew. 
But  he  left  this  matter  to  the  conscience  and  deter- 
mination of  the  church  of  the  place.  And  by  this 
means  of  both  parties'  continuing  communion,  the 
whole  matter  in  which  they  differed  was  at  last 
amicably  adjusted,  as  I  there  shew.  And  whereas 
the  conduct  of  Stephen  of  Rome,  who  would  have 
made  a  breach  of  this,  has  been  since  blamed  by  all 

d  Chap  29.  [See  above,  p.  359.  552.] 


572  Entreaty  for  Union. 

CHAP,  the  Christians,  as  well  of  Rome  as  of  other  places: 

XI. 

'. the  conduct  of  Cyprian  of  Africa,  who  gave  his  de- 

thrapo^'*''^  termination  of  the  question  with  this  additional 
sties.  clauses  [neminem  judicantes,  aut  a  jure  communio- 
nis  aliquem,  si  diversum  senserit,  amoventes  :  '  not 
'  judging  any  one,  nor  refusing  communion  with 
'  him,  though  he  be  of  the  other  opinion],'  has  been 
since  applauded  by  all  Christians  in  the  world,  as  a 
saying  worthy  of  so  excellent  a  martyr  of  Jesus 
Christ,  and  a  precedent  fit  to  be  observed  in  the 
determination  of  all  questions  that  are  not  funda- 
mental. 

The  other  difficulty  is,  that  if  such  a  man  do  come 
to  join  in  the  prayers  of  the  Church  of  England :  if 
there  be  an  infant  brought  to  be  baptized  in  the 
time  of  the  public  service,  he  cannot  join  in  the 
prayers  used  in  that  office  :  or,  at  least,  not  in  all  of 
them. 

This  must  be  confessed,  while  he  holds  that  opin- 
ion. But  I  shewed  before,  at  ^.  4,  that  this  ought 
not  to  hinder  his  joining  in  the  other  prayers  :  so 
that  paragraph  may  serve  for  answer  to  this.  He 
may,  when  the  people  are  kneeling  at  those  prayers, 
stand  up,  or  sit  and  read  in  his  Bible.  There  were 
in  king  William's  time  some,  that,  not  being  satisfied 
about  his  title,  thought  they  ought  not  join  in,  or 
say  Amen  to,  some  of  those  prayers  wherein  he  was 
named.  However  they  were  blamed  by  the  state 
for  not  agreeing  in  those ;  they  were  never  blamed 
by  the  church  for  continuing  to  join  in  the  rest. 

e  Proloquium  St.  Cypriani  in  Concil.  Cai-thag.  [See  the  first 
and  last  sentences  of  the  piece,  entitled  '  Sententia  Episcoporum 
'  Ixxxvii.  de  Hccreticis  Baptizandis,'  in  St.  Cyprian's  works, 
p.  229.  edit.  Fell.  p.  329.  edit.  Benedict.] 


Entreaty  for  Union.  573 

What  I  have  said   of  the  antipsedobaptists  does  chap. 
plainly  reach  to  the  case  of  several  other  dissenters. 


And  that  with  greater  force  of  the  argument,  because  thrap^o-^'^ 
they  differ  less  from  the  church  in  opinions.  *'^^''^- 

One  thing  I  am  persuaded  of  concerning  the 
antipsedobaptists  ;  and  that  is,  that  if  they  were 
convinced  that  this  joining  in  the  public  service 
of  the  Church  were  lawful  and  practicable  for  them, 
they  would  join  at  another  rate  than  some  shifting 
people  do  nowadays.  I  take  them  generally  to 
be  cordial,  open,  and  frank  expressers  of  their 
sentiments.  If  they  thought  that  St.  Paul's  com- 
mand of  '  receiving  one  another'  did  reach  to  this 
case  that  I  have  been  speaking  of,  (as  I  think  it 
does,)  they  would  not  interpret  it  trickishly,  as 
some  lawyers  do  a  statute  in  which  they  seek  a 
flaw  and  an  evasion :  to  lurk  behind  the  words  of 
it,  while  they  defeat  the  true  meaning.  They  would 
conclude,  that  what  God  commands  us  to  do,  he 
means  we  should  do  cordially,  sincerely,  and  bona 
fide ;  and  not  to  deal  with  his  word  as  a  Jesuit 
does  with  an  oath.  And  therefore  that  if  his  word 
do  bid  us  receive  one  another,  he  means  we  should 
do  it  entirely. 

There  is  one  entreaty  that  I  would  use  to  them ; 
which  is,  that  if  they  be  at  all  moved  to  consider  of 
such  joining,  and  to  deliberate  whether  it  be  lawful, 
or  be  a  duty,  or  not,  they  would  make  a  good  and 
prudent  choice  of  the  men  whose  advice  they  ask 
about  it.  There  are  some  men  among  all  parties 
(I  hope  it  is  not  many)  that  do  promote  divisions 
out  of  interest.  These,  as  St.  Paul  says,  serve  not 
our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  but  their  oivn  belly.  They 
consider    if   the    schism    should    drop,   what  would 


574  Entreaty  for  Union. 

CHAP,   become  of  that  esteem,  credit,  ajjplause,  admiration, 

gam,  &c.,  which  they  get  by  heading  and   leading 

theapo-^^  of  parties:  they  must  then  be  but  as  common 
sties.  Christians,  walking  even  with  the  rest  in  a  beaten 
road,  and  all  the  glory  of  setting  up  new  ways  would 
be  lost.  These  are  not  fit  for  any  pious  and  sincere 
man  to  trust  with  the  direction  of  his  conscience; 
nor  likely  to  give  a  true  verdict.  On  the  contrary, 
they  are  the  cause  of  most  of  the  divisions  which 
Christ  has  forbidden.  He  says  that  offences  [or 
scandals]  must  come :  and  St.  Paul  says,  there  must 
be  heresies  [or  divisions].  We  may  say  of  both, 
Woe  be  to  the  men  by  whom  they  come.  The  civil 
law  has,  I  think,  a  rule,  that  when  any  great  mis- 
chief appears  to  be  spread  among  the  people,  and  it 
is  not  known  who  were  the  authors  that  first  set  it 
on  foot,  it  should  be  inquired,  Cid  bono  fait?  Who 
are  the  men  that  are  likely  to  get  any  advantage 
by  it  ?  and  to  suspect  them.  These  that  promote 
division  for  interest,  keep  their  consciences,  as 
beggars  do  their  sores,  raw  and  open  on  purpose, 
and  would  not  have  them  healed  for  any  money. 
Let  not  any  honest  man  trust  them  with  the  keep- 
ing of  his.  But  apply  to  a  man  who  (of  which 
opinion  soever  he  be)  is  cordial,  sincere,  and  has 
no  interest  in  the  advice  he  gives. 

I  shall  conclude  with  the  words  of  St.  Paul,  which 
I  have  made,  as  it  were,  the  text  of  this  sermon : 
Receive  ye  one  another^  as  Christ  also  received  us. 
Christ  received  us,  when  we  were  not  only  silly, 
mistaken,  erroneous,  but  sinful  too.  He  received  us, 
that  he  might  make  us  wiser  and  better.  St.  Paul 
adds ;  to  the  glory  of  God :  meaning,  that  God  is  no 
way  more  dishonoured  than  by  our  divisions,  nor  any 


Entreaty  for  Union.  575 

ways  more  glorified  than  by  our  unity  and  receiving  chap. 
one  another.  !_ 


The  whole  context  is  thus,  Rom.  xv.  5,  6,  7  :  ^C^  f  ^" 

Now  the  God  of  'patience  and  consolation  grant^^^^^- 
you  to  he  likeminded  [i.  e.  unanimous]  one  toward 
another  according  to  Christ  Jesus  :  that  ye  may 
with  one  mind  and  one  mouth  [i.  e.  unanimously] 
glorify  God,  even  the  Father  of  our  Lord  Jesus 
Christ.  Wherefore  [or  to  which  purpose  that  you 
may  so  do]  receive  ye  one  another,  [though  differing 
in  opinion,]  as  Christ  also  received  us,  to  the  glory  of 
God.  Amen. 


AN  ALPHABETICAL 


AN  ALPHABETICAL  TABLE 

OF  SOME  FEW  MATTERS. 


Antipcedobaptism . 
St.  Austin  (year  after  the  apostles  317)  disputing  for 
the  doctrine  of  original  sin,  and  Pelagius  against  it,  do 
both  agree  that  no  Christian  (catholic  or  sectary)  that 
either  of  them  had  read  or  heard  of,  was  an  antipadobap- 
tist ;  part  i.  p.  383, 448.  The  opinion  of  antipaedobaptism 
not  a  sufficient  cause  of  separation ;  part  ii.  ch.  tilt. 

Baptism 
Given  by  the  Jews  to  proselytes,  and  their  infant 
children ;  Introduction.  Given  by  the  Christians  gene- 
rally by  dipping ;  part  ii.  p.  384 :  but  by  affusion  in  case 
of  weakness,  &c. ;  part  ii.  p.  385.  Other  washings,  beside 
dipping,  are  in  Scripture  called  baptism,  or  the  baptizing 
of  a  man ;  part  ii.  p.  329. 

Bishops. 

The  Christians  of  Irenaeus'  time  [anno  180]  were  able  to 
reckon  up  those  that  were  placed  bishops  by  the  apostles 
in  the  several  churches,  and  their  successors  to  that  time ; 
part  i.  p.  59 ;  part  ii.  p.  441.  Valentinian  the  emperor  said, 
It  was  a  thing  too  great  for  him  to  undertake,  to  nominate 
a  bishop  ;  part  ii.  p.  70,  98.  They  were  wont  in  the  primi- 
tive  church  to  be  chosen  by  the  clergy  and  people  of  the 
diocese ;  part  ii.  p.  385. 

Councils. 

Infant-baptism  not  instituted  or  enacted  in  any  council ; 
but  in  all  that  speak  of  it,  is  supposed  or  taken  for  granted 
as  a  Christian  doctrine  known  before;  part  i.  p.  136,259. 
One  of  the  earliest  councils  since  the  apostles'  time  speaks 

WALL,  VOL.  II.  P  p 


578  An  Alphabetical  Tablo 

of  it ;  part  i.  p.  126.  The  councils  of  Carthage  and  Milevis, 
[anno  416,]  and  that  of  Carthage,  [anno  418,]  do  not  enact 
that  infants  must  be  baptized,  (that  being  a  known  thing 
before,)  but  that  baptism  is  in  them  for  remission  of  sin ; 
part  i.  p.  425,  &c.,  468,  &c.;  part  ii.  p.  26, 27. 

Dipping  Infants  in  the  Font. 

The  general  use  formerly;  partii.  p.  384.  When  left  off 
in  the  several  countries  of  Europe ;  part  ii.  p.  393 — 406. 
Still  used  in  all  countries,  hot  or  cold,  except  such  where 
the  Pope"'s  power  does  or  did  prevail ;  part  ii.  p.  413,  414. 

Godfathers  in  Baptism. 

Used  by  the  Jews  at  the  circumcision  of  their  children, 
and  at  the  baptism  of  an  infant  proselyte,  or  disciple; 
Introduction.  Mentioned  as  used  by  the  Christians  in 
the  baptism  of  infants  within  one  hundred  years  after  the 
apostles,  and  all  along  afterward  ;  part  i.  p.  93.  The 
answer  that  they  made  in  the  name  of  the  child ;  part  i. 
p.  260,  520,  &c. ;  part  ii.  p.  437,  &c.  The  parents  commonly 
were  the  godfathers ;  part  i.  p.  265, 273. 

Infants. 

Whether  baptized  or  not  in  the  apostles'  time,  could  not 
be  unknown  to  the  Christians  that  were  ancient  mer  one 
hundred  or  one  hundred  and  fifty  years  after  the  said 
time ;  Preface.  In  what  sense  said  to  be  regenerated  by 
the  Holy  Spirit ;  part  i.  p.  277.  281.  The  ancients  did 
not  think  that  infants  have  faith;  part  i.  p.  276, 280,  281. 
Not  baptized  in  houses,  but  in  cases  of  the  utmost  ex- 
tremity ;  part  i.  p.  302.  Dying  unbaptized  thought  by 
the  ancients  to  miss  of  heaven,  but  yet  to  be  under  no 
punishment,  or  a  very  mild  one  ;  part  ii.  p.  195 — 219. 
Dying  after  baptism,  and  before  actual  sin,  agreed  by  all 
the  Christian  world  to  be  saved  :  part  ii.  p.  225,  &c. 
If  offered  by  their  parents  or  owners  to  baptism,  ought 
to  be  baptized,  of  wshatoever  parents  born ;  part  ii.  p.  229, 
230,  &c. 


of  some  few  Matters.  579 

Poll/gamy 
Forbidden  in  the  New  Testament ;  part  i.  p.  154. 

Regeneration,  or  heing  horn  again. 
The    word    regeneration,    regenerated,   &c.    never    used 
by  the  ancients  but  when  they  speak  of  baptism ;  part  ii. 
p.  180,  495. 

BebeUion. 
St.  Ambrose  conckides  that  Maximus  and  Eugenius  are 
in  hell,  for  their  rebellions,  though  against  a  tyrannous  and 
heretical  emperor;  part  ii.  p.  68. 

Schism. 
The  penance  for  it  to  last  ten  years  ;  part  i.  p.  149. 

Sects. 
No  sect  before  the  year  1 100,  that  allowed  any  baptism 
at  all,  denied  it  to  infants;  part  i.  p.  497 — 515. 

Hocinians 
Endeavour  to  bring  into  disrepute  all  the  ancient  Chris- 
tians,   and   their   writings ;    part  ii.  p.  146,  147 ;    argue 
against  the  doctrine  of  the  Trinity,  not  in  a  serious,  but  in 
a  mocking  way ;  part  ii.  p.  361. 


Some 


[    580    ] 

Some  Texts  of  Scripture  ewplained  by  the  Ancients. 

PART   I. 

ICor.  vii.  1,2 p.  154. 

ICor.  vii.  14   p.  181.  242.  385. 

1  Pet.  iii.  19;  iv.  6 p.  53. 

Col.  ii.  11,12 p.  65, 

1  Tim.  ii.  15 p.  239. 

Rom.  V.  12 p  24y 

1  Cor.  XV.  29 p.  505. 

PART  II. 

John  iii.  3,5 p.  180. 

Col.  i.  15 p.  447, 

Phil.  ii.  7 p.  447. 


Amendments  of  Readings  in  the  Fathers,  which 
restore  the  Sense. 

PART  I. 

August,  de  Gen.  ad  lit.  lib.  x.  c.  23.  esset  lege  esse  ...  p,  287. 

Concil.  Carthag.  iii.  Can.  ^%.  ne\.  an p.  309. 

Gennadius,  Catalog,  verho  Pelagius,  eulogiarwn  1.  eclo- 

9<^rum p^  433, 

Hieronym.  Epist.  153.  de  monogamia  1.  de  anima  ...  p.  343. 
August,  de  Natura  et  Gratia,  c.  36.  quod  1.  quid...  p.  405. 

PART  II. 

Hilarius  de  Synodis,  prope  finem,  invisihiliter  1.  in- 

dimsibiliter  p,  177^ 

Wicklyff.  Trialog.  1.  iv.  c.  11.  baptizari  1.  laptizare  p.  397. 


END  OF  VOL.  II. 


Princeton   Theological   Seminary   Libraries 


1    1012   01172   1265 


DATE    DUE 

GAYLORD 

PRINTED  IN  U  S.A.